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

Thursday, September 16, 2010

Thursday September 16, 2010


1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
Ex Parte Liu et al 10/820,647 SCHEINER 112(1) GLOBAL PATENT GROUP - KAL Examiner Name RAO, DEEPAK R

In other words, “Section 112 does not require that a specification convince persons skilled in the art that the assertions therein are correct.” In re Armbruster, 512 F.2d 676, 678 (CCPA 1975). Instead, “it is incumbent upon the Patent Office . . . to explain why it doubts the truth or accuracy of any statement in a supporting disclosure and to back up assertions of its own with acceptable evidence or reasoning which is inconsistent with the contested statement.” In re Marzocchi, 439 F.2d 220, 224 (CCPA 1971).

Armbruster, In re, 512 F. 2d 676, 185 USPQ 152 (CCPA 1975) . . . . 608.01(b), 2161, 2181

Marzocchi, In re, 439 F.2d 220, 169 USPQ 367 (CCPA 1971) . . . 2107.01, 2107.02, 2124, 2163, 2163.04, 2164.03, 2164.04, 2164

Ex Parte Miller et al 11/487,556 GRIMES 103(a) MTI - INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY HARTER, SECREST & EMERY, LLP Examiner Name TRAN, SUSAN T

Ex Parte Allef et al 11/369,566 GREEN 102(b)/103(a) LEOPOLD PRESSER SCULLY, SCOTT, MURPHY & PRESSER Examiner Name CLAYTOR, DEIRDRE RENEE

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
Ex Parte Ford et al 11/841,666 WARREN 102(e)/103(a) PHAN LAW GROUP PLLC Examiner Name CHEUNG, WILLIAM K

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
Ex Parte Lee 10/902,607 DANG 103(a) IBM CORP (YA) C/O YEE & ASSOCIATES PC Examiner Name ZAMAN, FAISAL M

2400 Networking, Mulitplexing, Cable, and Security

Ex Parte Paul et al 10/338,762 MARTIN 103(a) Buckley, Maschoff & Talwalkar LLC/Intel Corporation Examiner Name CHOU, ALAN S

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
Ex Parte Talesky et al 10/875,119 PATE III 103(a) GREER, BURNS & CRAIN Examiner Name ALIE, GHASSEM


1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
Ex Parte Wang et al 10/021,341 OWENS 103(a)/112(2) Eastman Kodak Company Examiner Name HESS, BRUCE H

“[T]he indefiniteness inquiry asks whether the claims ‘circumscribe a particular area with a reasonable degree of precision and particularity.’” Marley Mouldings Ltd. v. Mikron Industries Inc., 417 F.3d 1356, 1359 (Fed. Cir. 2005), quoting In re Moore, 439 F.2d 1232, 1235 (CCPA 1971).

Moore, In re, 439 F.2d 1232, 169 USPQ 236 (CCPA 1971) . . . . . . . .1504.04, 2164.08, 2172

Ex Parte Wu 11/187,206 HANLON 102(b)/103(a) ALSTON & BIRD, LLP Examiner Name AMAKWE, TAMRA L

In re Nehrenberg, 280 F.2d 161, 165 (CCPA 1960) (“We are not aided by the specification herein in determining what degrees are included within the broad term ‘substantially.’”); see also Seattle Box Co., Inc. v. Indus. Crating & Packing, Inc., 731 F.2d 818, 826 (Fed. Cir. 1984) (when a word of degree is used, it must be determined whether the specification provides some standard for measuring that degree).

Nehrenberg, In re, 280 F.2d 161, 126 USPQ 383 (CCPA 1960) . . . . . . . . .

Seattle Box Co. v. Industrial Crating & Packing, Inc., 731 F.2d 818, 221 USPQ 568 (Fed. Cir. 1984) . . . 2173.05(b)

Ex Parte Raghavendran 11/141,238 TIMM 103(a) CLEMENTS BERNARD PLLC Examiner Name GRAY, JILL M

2400 Networking, Mulitplexing, Cable, and Security
Ex Parte Murthy 10/926,497 EASTHOM 103(a) HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY Examiner Name SHIN, KYUNG H

Ex Parte Roy et al 10/387,177 HOFF 102(e)/103(a) HUGHES ELECTRONICS CORPORATION Examiner Name MILLS, DONALD L



Ex Parte Blanc
Ex Parte Bullman et al
Ex Parte Nadvit et al
Ex Parte Weedling et al
Ex Parte Werner


Ex Parte Mullally et al
Ex Parte Quine et al


Ex Parte Borenstein et al
Ex Parte Bracewell
Ex Parte Chiquet-Ehrismann et al
Ex Parte Domagalski et al
Ex Parte Giesler et al
Ex Parte Han et al
Ex Parte House et al
Ex Parte Kaghazian
Ex Parte Kanojia et al
Ex Parte Kempin et al
Ex Parte Khatua et al
Ex Parte Kinney et al
Ex Parte Nefzger et al
Ex Parte Nguyen et al
Ex Parte Raghavendran
Ex Parte Sano et al
Ex Parte Surwit et al
Ex Parte Westbye
Ex Parte Zhang

No comments :