SEARCH

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

Tuesday, July 20, 2010

Tuesday July 20, 2010

REVERSED

1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
Ex Parte Reguri et al 11/219,976 LEBOVITZ 102(b) DR. REDDY'S LABORATORIES, INC. EXAMINER MABRY, JOHN

There is no per se prohibition of patenting a “new form” of a compound. To the contrary, there are numerous cases in which a new form of a known compound was determined to be patentable. See, e.g., Abbott Labs. v. Sandoz Inc., 566 F.3d 1282 (Fed. Cir. 2009).

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
Ex Parte Jensen et al 10/838,533 SCHEINER 103(a) FROMMER LAWRENCE & HAUG EXAMINER TRAN LIEN, THUY

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
Ex Parte Sayal et al 09/943,223 DIXON 103(a) HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY EXAMINER DENG, ANNA CHEN

Ex Parte Phenix 10/667,816 DANG 101/103(a) MICHAEL B. JOHANNESEN, ESQ. LOWENSTEIN SANDLER, P.C. EXAMINER RADTKE, MARK A

Though the Examiner finds that “[t]he claims are rejected as falling under the judicial exception of an abstract idea … not statutory within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. 101” (Ans. 3), “an applicant may show that a process claim satisfies § 101 either by showing that his claim is tied to a particular machine, or by showing that his claim transforms an article” into a different state or thing. See Gottschalk v. Benson, 409 U.S. 63, 70 (1972).

Gottschalk v. Benson, 409 U.S. 63, 175 USPQ 673 (1972). . . . .2106, 2106.01, 2106.02

2600 Communications
Ex Parte Saunders et al 10/447,514 NAPPI 103(a) LAW OFFICES OF WAYNE JONES EXAMINER GE, YUZHEN

Ex Parte Ceshkovsky 10/190,382 HAHN 101/112(1) PIONEER NORTH AMERICA, INC. EXAMINER ORTIZ CRIADO, JORGE L

For the forgoing reasons we find a disclosed operative embodiment. We, therefore, will not sustain the rejection under § 101 of claims 1-60 because our reviewing court has stated “[t]o violate [35 U.S.C.] § 101 the claimed device must be totally incapable of achieving a useful result.” Brooktree Corp. v. Advanced Micro Devices, Inc., 977 F.2d 1555, 1571 (Fed. Cir. 1992) (emphasis added).

Brooktree Corp. v. Advanced Micro Devices, Inc., 977 F.2d 1555, 24 USPQ2d 1401 (Fed. Cir. 1992) . . . . . . . 2107.01

Ex Parte Frakes et al 10/865,084 HAIRSTON 102(e)/103(a) THOMAS, KEYDEN, HORSTEMEYER & RISLEY, L.L.P. EXAMINER LE, BRIAN Q

2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components

Ex Parte Chin et al 11/287,966 RUGGIERO 102(b)/103(a) Kathy Manke Avago Technologies Limited EXAMINER MARSHALL, CHRISTLE I

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
Ex Parte Peters 10/758,853 CRAWFORD 103(a) CAREY, RODRIGUEZ, GREENBERG & PAUL, LLP STEVEN M. GREENBERG EXAMINER FIELDS, BENJAMIN S

Ex Parte Wylie 09/971,908 CRAWFORD 103(a) Philmore H. Colburn II Cantor Colburn LLP EXAMINER RUHL, DENNIS WILLIAM

See Texas Instruments Inc. v. United States Int'l Trade Comm'n, 988 F.2d 1165, 1171 (Fed. Cir. 1993) (claim language cannot be mere surplusage; an express limitation cannot be read out of the claim).

Texas Instruments, Inc. v. Int’l Trade Comm’n, 988 F.2d 1165, 26 USPQ2d 1018 (Fed. Cir. 1993) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
716.04

AFFIRMED-IN-PART

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
Ex Parte Weiland et al 10/620,732 SIU 102(b) NAVTEQ NORTH AMERICA, LLC EXAMINER TO, TUAN C

REEXAMINATION

inter partes

EXAMINER AFFIRMED-IN-PART


3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU)

THE C.W. ZUMBIEL COMPANY, INC. Requester, Cross-Appellant, Respondent v. GRAPHIC PACKAGING INTERNATIONAL, INC.1 Patent Owner, Appellant, Respondent 95/000,077 6,715,639 SONG 103(a) James F. Vaughan Womble Carlyle Sandridge & Rice cc Third Party Requester: KEITH R. HAUPT, ESQ. Wood Herron & Evans LLP EXAMINER FOSTER, JIMMY G

NEW

REVERSED

Ex Parte Baxter et al
Ex Parte Kamon et al
Ex Parte Kunkee et al
Ex Parte Taylor
Ex Parte Zelazo et al

AFFIRMED-IN-PART

Ex Parte Rudelic
Ex Parte Xu et al

REEXAMINATION

Ex parte RF DELAWARE, INC., Appellant
Ex parte RF DELAWARE, INC., Appellant

AFFIRMED

Ex Parte Distefano
Ex Parte Etzold
Ex Parte Jourdan et al
Ex Parte Keller et al
Ex Parte Kimbrell et al
Ex Parte Kloke et al
Ex Parte Pabla et al
Ex Parte Wagstaff
Ex Parte Yaeger

REHEARING

Ex Parte Van Der Vleuten et al

No comments :