PTAB.US: Decisions of PTAB Patent Trial and Appeal Board Updated Daily.

Thursday, January 7, 2010


1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
Ex Parte Moscato et al HANLON 103(a) CLEMENTS BERNARD PLLC

Ex Parte Wilson et al McKELVEY 102(b)/102(e)/112(2) 37 C.F.R. § 41.59(b) Flindt Intellectual Property Law Group, PLLC

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
Ex Parte Gschwind et al COURTENAY 103(a) TUTUNJIAN & BITETTO, P.C.

2600 Communications
Ex Parte Herle et al KRIVAK 102(a)/102(e) KIS


2100 Computer Architecture and Software
Ex Parte Freytag SIU 102(b)/103(a) HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY

“[I]t is inappropriate for appellants to discuss in their reply brief matters not raised in . . . the principal brief[]. Reply briefs are to be used to reply to matter[s] raised in the brief of the appellee.” Kaufman Company v. Lantech, Inc. , 807 F.2d 970, 973 n.* (Fed. Cir. 1986).

Kaufman Co. v. Lantech, Inc., 807 F.2d 970, 1 USPQ2d 1202 (Fed. Cir. 1986) . . . . . . 2293, 2693

“Considering an argument advanced for the first time in a reply brief . . . is not only unfair to an appellee but also entails the risk of an improvident or ill-advised opinion on the legal issues tendered.” McBride v. Merrell Dow and Pharms., Inc. , 800 F.2d 1208, 1211 (D.C. Cir. 1986) (internal citations omitted).

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design

Ex Parte Petersen TIERNEY 102(b) McCormick, Paulding & Huber, LLP

No comments :