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

Search This Blog

Loading...

Thursday, June 30, 2011

minerals, wands, bush, EMI, raytheon

REVERSED

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1713 Ex Parte Zojaji et al 11/242,613 SMITH 103(a) PATTERSON & SHERIDAN, LLP - - APPM/TX EXAMINER DEO, DUY VU NGUYEN

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3628 Ex Parte Hinnebusch 10/015,866 KIM 102(b)/103(a) 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 112(2) PETER K. TRZYNA, ESQ. EXAMINER NELSON, FREDA ANN

3643 Ex Parte Aandewiel et al 11/600,598 ASTORINO 103(a) DORITY & MANNING, P.A. EXAMINER PARSLEY, DAVID J

3663 Ex Parte Greatbatch 10/998,188 PATE III 112(1)/101/103(a) WALTER W. DUFT EXAMINER MONDT, JOHANNES P

3682 Ex Parte Pudar 09/870,377 McCARTHY 103(a) General Motors Corporation c/o REISING ETHINGTON P.C. EXAMINER MYHRE, JAMES W

3686 Ex Parte Diakides et al 11/222,947 KIM 103(a) NICHOLAS A. DIAKIDES EXAMINER
RAJ, RAJIV J

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3761 Ex Parte Ehrnsperger et al 11/251,311 PATE III 103(a) THE PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY EXAMINER STEPHENS, JACQUELINE F

The standard for determining whether the specification meets the enablement requirement was cast in the Supreme Court decision of Minerals Separation v. Hyde, 242 U.S. 261, 270 (1916), which postured the question: is the experimentation needed to practice the invention undue or unreasonable? That standard is still the one to be applied. In re Wands, 858 F.2d 731, 737 (Fed. Cir. 1988).

Mineral Separation v. Hyde, 242 U.S. 261 (1916) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2164.01

Wands, In re, 858 F.2d 731, 8 USPQ2d 1400 (Fed. Cir. 1988) . . . . . . .706.03(a), 706.03(b), 2164.01, 2164.01(a), 2164.06, 2164.06(b)

AFFIRMED-IN-PART

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2182 Ex Parte Steinmetz et al 11/010,842 STEPHENS 103(a) OLYMPIC PATENT WORKS PLLC EXAMINER NGUYEN, TANH Q

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3657 Ex Parte Medendorp 10/644,354 COCKS 102(b)/103(a) CARLSON, GASKEY & OLDS, P.C. EXAMINER TORRES WILLIAMS, MELANIE

3688 Ex Parte Hoffberg et al 11/467,915 PETRAVICK 103(a) 37 CFR 41.50(b) 101 Ostrolenk Faber LLP EXAMINER CHAMPAGNE, DONALD

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3711 Ex Parte Sutherland et al 11/039,531 PATE III 103(a) EMCH, SCHAFFER, SCHAUB & PORCELLO CO EXAMINER RICCI, JOHN A

As an initial matter we note that our reviewing court’s predecessor has stated that the order in which prior art is applied in a rejection is not significant. See, for example, In re Bush, 296 F.2d 491, 496, (CCPA 1961) ("[i]n a case of this type where a rejection is predicated on two references
each containing pertinent disclosure which has been pointed out to the applicant, we deem it to be a matter of no significance, but merely a matter of exposition, that the rejection is stated to be on A in view of B instead of B in view of A, or to term one reference primary and the other secondary.")

REEXAMINATION

EXAMINER AFFIRMED

3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU)
Ex parte Tantivy Communications, Inc., Appellant and Patent Owner TESCO CORPORATION
95/001,113 7,048,050 SONG 102/103(a) For Patent Owner: MORGAN LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP For Third Party Requester : BRACEWELL & GIULIANI LLPEXAMINER GRAHAM, MATTHEW C

EXAMINER AFFIRMED-IN-PART

3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU)
Requester, Cross-Appellant, Respondent v. Patent of WEATHERFORD/LAMB, INC. Patent Owner, Appellant, Respondent 90/008,990 6,151,332 TURNER 103(a) VOLPE AND KOENIG, P.C. EXAMINER LAROSE, COLIN M


AFFIRMED

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1784 Ex Parte Sigler et al 11/155,180 SMITH Concurring PAK 102(b)/103(a) General Motors Corporation c/o REISING ETHINGTON P.C. EXAMINER LAM, CATHY FONG FONG

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2111 Ex Parte Whaley 11/127,049 BLANKENSHIP 102(b)/103(a) Docket Clerk Dallas TX EXAMINER DANG, KHANH

2400 Networking, Mulitplexing, Cable, and Security
2457 Ex Parte Mastin Crosbie et al 09/793,355 MacDONALD 102(e) Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP/Oracle EXAMINER OSMAN, RAMY M

2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2885 Ex Parte Medendorp 11/708,818 DROESCH 103(a) MYERS BIGEL SIBLEY & SAJOVEC EXAMINER CROWE, DAVID R

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3721 Ex Parte Howell 11/634,454 HORNER 103(a) DAY PITNEY LLP ACCOUNT: ILLINOIS TOOL WORKS INC. EXAMINER TAWFIK, SAMEH

3739 Ex Parte Prabhu et al 09/891,773 BAHR 102(e) Carestream Health, Inc. EXAMINER COHEN, LEE S

3748 Ex Parte Lifson 11/544,403 HORNER 103(a) CARLSON, GASKEY & OLDS, P.C. EXAMINER TRIEU, THERESA

3774 Ex Parte Fariabi 10/750,079 HOELTER 103(a) FULWIDER PATTON LLP EXAMINER PREBILIC, PAUL B

3774 Ex Parte Trese et al 11/234,518 DELMENDO 101/112(1)/103(a) Patent Procurement Services EXAMINER PREBILIC, PAUL B

“A claimed invention having an inoperable or impossible claim limitation may lack utility under 35 U.S.C. § 101 and certainly lacks an enabling disclosure under 35 U.S.C. § 112.” EMI Group North America, Inc. v. Cypress Semiconductor Corp., 268 F.3d 1342, 1348 (Fed. Cir. 2001) (citing Raytheon Co. v. Roper Corp., 724 F.2d 951, 956 (Fed. Cir. 1983)). “When a claim itself recites incorrect science in one limitation, the entire claim is invalid, regardless of the combinations of the other limitations recited in the claim.” EMI, 268 F.3d at 1349.

Raytheon v. Roper, 724 F.2d 951, 220 USPQ 592 (Fed. Cir. 1983) . .2107.02, 2164.08

REHEARING

DENIED
1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1789 Ex Parte Taylor et al 11/429,507 GRIMES Technology Advancement Labs LLC EXAMINER TRAN LIEN, THUY

NEW

REVERSED

3684 Ex Parte Foy et al 11/226,463 DESHPANDE 103(a) NIXON & VANDERHYE, PC EXAMINER MARCUS, LELAND R

1765 Ex Parte Hulse et al 11/955,475 ROBERTSON 103(a) HONEYWELL/FOX ROTHSCHILD EXAMINER COONEY, JOHN M

1645 Ex Parte Miller 10/470,797 MILLS 103(a) FULBRIGHT & JAWORSKI L.L.P. EXAMINER TONGUE, LAKIA J

3691 Ex Parte Mitchell et al 10/169,501 CRAWFORD 103(a) YOUNG & THOMPSON EXAMINER ONYEZIA, CHUKS N

3685 Ex Parte Raley et al 10/388,162 FISCHETTI 112(2)/102(b)/103(a) Reed Smith LLP EXAMINER KIM, STEVEN S

3624 Ex Parte Santos et al 10/378,872 MOHANTY 102(e) HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY EXAMINER MANSFIELD, THOMAS L

1621 Ex Parte STAUFFER 12/632,840 ADAMS 103(a) YOUNG BASILE EXAMINER PARSA, JAFAR F

AFFIRMED-IN-PART

2114 Ex Parte JOHANSSON et al 11/834,731 POTHIER 112(1)/103(a) 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 112(2)/101 YOUNG & THOMPSON EXAMINER CHU, GABRIEL L

3749 Ex Parte Schnell et al 10/413,018 BROWN 103(a) BSH HOME APPLIANCES CORPORATION EXAMINER PRICE, CARL D

2453 Ex Parte Wilson et al 11/455,037 DROESCH 102(e)/103(a) CARR & FERRELL LLP EXAMINER NGUYEN, THU HA T

AFFIRMED

2442 Ex Parte Beisiegel et al 10/489,051 MacDONALD 103(a) RSW IP Law IBM CORPORATION EXAMINER NICKERSON, JEFFREY L

2183 Ex Parte Dieffenderfer et al 11/363,072 DANG 102(e)/103(a) QUALCOMM INCORPORATED EXAMINER FAHERTY, COREY S

2178 Ex Parte Lu et al 10/668,399 BARRY 103(a) IBM CORP (AP) EXAMINER QUELER, ADAM M

3632 Ex Parte MATIAS 11/735,523 STAICOVICI 102(b)/103(a) PERRY + CURRIER INC. EXAMINER KING, ANITA M

2166 Ex Parte Raley et al 11/141,229 BLANKENSHIP 102(b)/103(a) HAMILTON & TERRILE, LLP EXAMINER TANG, JIEYING

2156 Ex Parte Recio et al 11/304,954 KOHUT 103(a) IBM CORPORATION (RVW) EXAMINER OBISESAN, AUGUSTINE KUNLE

3774 Ex Parte Reed et al 11/252,169 HORNER 103(a) Bausch & Lomb Incorporated EXAMINER MATTHEWS, WILLIAM H

3715 Ex Parte Seelig et al 09/791,463 BROWN 102(e) IAN F. BURNS & ASSOCIATES EXAMINER MOSSER, KATHLEEN MICHELE

3644 Ex Parte Simoni 11/039,210 STAICOVICI 103(a) JACQUELYN R. SIMONI EXAMINER ABBOTT, YVONNE RENEE

3667 Ex Parte Turgeon 10/086,793 LORIN 103(a) KILPATRICK TOWNSEND & STOCKTON LLP EXAMINER BADII, BEHRANG

REHEARING

DENIED
2448 Ex Parte Traversat et al 10/055,645 KRIVAK 103(a) MHKKG/Oracle (Sun) EXAMINER LUU, LE HIEN

Wednesday, June 29, 2011

gardner, dailey

REVERSED

1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1624 Ex Parte Argade et al 11/834,473 ADAMS 112(1)/obviousness-type double patenting McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP EXAMINER RAO, DEEPAK R

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1733 Ex Parte Forbes Jones et al 10/656,918 FRANKLIN 103(a) Patrick J. Viccaro, Esquire
Allegheny Technologies Incorporated EXAMINER ROE, JESSEE RANDALL

1787 Ex Parte Loretti et al 10/562,368 FRANKLIN 102(b)/103(a) KLEIN, O'NEILL & SINGH, LLP EXAMINER AHMED, SHEEBA

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2163 Ex Parte Martin et al 10/549,365 CHEN 102(e) NIXON & VANDERHYE, PC EXAMINER
BROWN, SHEREE N

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3617 Ex Parte Storteig et al 10/869,466 ASTORINO 103(a) WesternGeco L.L.C. EXAMINER SWINEHART, EDWIN L

AFFIRMED-IN-PART

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2112 Ex Parte Azadet et al 10/022,665 MANTIS MERCADER 103(a) RYAN, MASON & LEWIS, LLP EXAMINER TORRES, JOSEPH D

REEXAMINATION

EXAMINER REVERSED 37 C.F.R. § 41.77(b)

3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU)
FACEBOOK, INC. Third Party Requester, Appellant v. CROSS ATLANTIC CAPITAL PARTNERS, INC. Patent Owner, Cross-Appellant 95/001,070 6,519,629 SIU 102(b)/102(e)/103(a) 37 C.F.R. § 41.77(b) 102(b)/102(e)/103(a) Patent Owner BUCHANAN, INGERSOLL & ROONEY PC Third Party Requester DANIEL M. DEVOS EXAMINER HUGHES, DEANDRA M

EXAMINER AFFIRMED

3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU)
Ex parte The Hall Patent Group, LLC. 90/007,233 6,422,413 LEE 103(a) WILLIAM A. HALL EXAMINER GRAHAM, MATTHEW C

AFFIRMED

1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1611 Ex Parte Kumar Gidwani et al 10/272,812 WALSH 103(a) PHARMACEUTICAL PATENT ATTORNEYS, LLC EXAMINER CHANNAVAJJALA, LAKSHMI SARADA

1623 Ex Parte Kai et al 10/578,912 GRIMES 103(a) BUCHANAN, INGERSOLL & ROONEY PC EXAMINER BLAND, LAYLA D

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1715 Ex Parte Walters et al 10/324,725 KRATZ 103(a) PPG INDUSTRIES INC EXAMINER
TALBOT, BRIAN K

1741 Ex Parte Recker et al 10/888,542 WARREN 103(a) NIXON & VANDERHYE, PC EXAMINER DANIELS, MATTHEW J

Further, it is also well established that where the difference between the prior art and the claims are a recitation of relative dimension of the claimed device, and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device is not patentably distinct from the prior art device. See, e.g., Gardner v. TEC Sys., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 1346 (Fed. Cir. 1984); see also In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 676 (CCPA 1966) (configuration of a claimed disposable plastic nursing container was a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent pervasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed container was significant).

Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984) . . . . 2144.04

Dailey, In re, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2144.04

1764 Ex Parte Dairoku et al 11/353,238 SMITH 103(a) ROYLANCE, ABRAMS, BERDO & GOODMAN, L.L.P. EXAMINER REDDY, KARUNA P

1767 Ex Parte Ashbaugh et al 11/558,666 PRATS 102(b)/102(a)/103(a) FINA TECHNOLOGY INC EXAMINER KARST, DAVID THOMAS

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2123 Ex Parte Patrizio et al 10/767,524 WINSOR 103(a) HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY EXAMINER KIM, EUNHEE

2171 Ex Parte Shafron et al 10/015,816 CHEN 103(a) YAHOO! INC. C/O GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP EXAMINER ROSWELL, MICHAEL

2184 Ex Parte Sand et al 11/097,799 MacDONALD 102(e)/103(a) IBM CORPORATION EXAMINER TSENG, CHENG YUAN

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3663 Ex Parte Roelleke et al 10/511,969 McCARTHY 103(a) KENYON & KENYON LLP EXAMINER TO, TUAN C

REHEARING

DENIED

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1783 Ex Parte Sjoberg 10/477,141 FRANKLIN NOVAK, DRUCE + QUIGG L.L.P. - PERGO EXAMINER SIMONE, CATHERINE A


NEW

REVERSED

1723 Ex Parte Colibaba-Evulet et al 10/745,356 SMITH 112(1)/103(a) GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY EXAMINER HANDAL, KAITY V

2178 Ex Parte Griffin et al 11/080,444 BLANKENSHIP 103(a) RIM/FINNEGAN EXAMINER TSUI, WILSON W

2191 Ex Parte Liao et al 10/245,548 ROBERTSON 103(a) INTEL CORPORATION EXAMINER ZHEN, WEI Y

1732 Ex Parte Massidda et al 10/840,394 SMITH 103(a) MILLEN, WHITE, ZELANO & BRANIGAN, P.C. EXAMINER HAILEY, PATRICIA L

1783 Ex Parte Numrich et al 10/172,017 SMITH 102(b)/103(a) OBLON, SPIVAK, MCCLELLAND MAIER & NEUSTADT, L.L.P. EXAMINER FERGUSON, LAWRENCE D

3621 Ex Parte Padhye et al 10/162,699 LORIN 102(e) Reed Smith LLP EXAMINER AUGUSTIN, EVENS J

1734 Ex Parte Sesing et al 11/816,045 SMITH 103(a) OBLON, SPIVAK, MCCLELLAND MAIER & NEUSTADT, L.L.P. EXAMINER NGUYEN, NGOC YEN M

1765 Ex Parte Sosa et al 10/674,224 SMITH 102(b)/103(a) FINA TECHNOLOGY INC EXAMINER NUTTER, NATHAN M

1772 Ex Parte Wada et al 10/682,903 SMITH 103(a) OBLON, SPIVAK, MCCLELLAND MAIER & NEUSTADT, L.L.P. EXAMINER HYUN, PAUL SANG HWA

AFFIRMED-IN-PART

2158 Ex Parte Beyer et al 10/788,556 THOMAS 112(2)/102(b) IBM_SVL EXAMINER DARNO, PATRICK A

2115 Ex Parte Naffziger 10/320,586 WINSOR 102(e) HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY EXAMINER CAO, CHUN

3627 Ex Parte Newton et al 11/269,226 LORIN 103(a) WINSTEAD P.C. EXAMINER
BUCHANAN, CHRISTOPHER R

3695 Ex Parte Rebenack et al 10/421,996 LORIN 103(a) Qwest Communications International Inc. EXAMINER LIU, CHIA-YI

AFFIRMED

1634 Ex Parte Ballinger et al 10/176,055 McCOLLUM 103(a) HOFFMAN WARNICK LLC EXAMINER SALMON, KATHERINE D

2171 Ex Parte Bertram et al 10/281,803 ZECHER 102(e)/103(a) LAW OFFICE OF IDO TUCHMAN (SJO) EXAMINER NUNEZ, JORDANY

3767 Ex Parte Boyle et al 10/749,046 CHEN 103(a) FULWIDER PATTON LLP EXAMINER
GILBERT, ANDREW M

1619 Ex Parte Daou et al 10/579,649 PRATS 103(a) UNILEVER PATENT GROUP EXAMINER BLANCHARD, DAVID J

3626 Ex Parte Dvorak et al 10/052,659 LORIN 103(a) Epic Systems Corporation c/o Quarles & Brady LLP EXAMINER MORGAN, ROBERT W

3682 Ex Parte Harris 09/760,271 MOHANTY 102(b) HENNEMAN & ASSOCIATES, PLC EXAMINER ALVAREZ, RAQUEL

1785 Ex Parte Sharma Manish 11/285,851 OWENS 102(a)(b)(e) HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY EXAMINER BERNATZ, KEVIN M

1771 Ex Parte Marion et al 10/398,239 PAK 103(a) Millen White Zelano & Branigan EXAMINER
SINGH, PREM C

1715 Ex Parte Mikhael et al 11/137,823 SMITH 103(a) ANTONIO R. DURANDO EXAMINER LIN, JAMES

2161 Ex Parte Sykes 10/160,922 DESHPANDE 102(b) IBM CORPORATION EXAMINER NGUYEN, CAM LINH T

Tuesday, June 28, 2011

fallaux, richardson-vicks, bayer

REVERSED

1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1621 Ex Parte Boehm 12/026,567 ADAMS 103(a) BROOKS KUSHMAN P.C. EXAMINER KATAKAM, SUDHAKAR

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1762 Ex Parte Yadav et al 11/808,766 WALSH 112(1)/112(2)/102(b)/102(e)/103(a) PPG INDUSTRIES INC EXAMINER YOON, TAE H

2400 Networking, Mulitplexing, Cable, and Security
2474 Ex Parte Buda et al 10/359,218 KRIVAK 103(a) HARRITY & HARRITY, LLP EXAMINER HAILE, FEBEN

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3634 Ex Parte Chamberlain et al 11/349,019 CLARKE 103(a) W. ALLEN MARCONTELL EXAMINER RAMSEY, JEREMY C

3641 Ex Parte Rednikov 10/544,358 SPAHN 102(b) Valeriy Rednikov EXAMINER LEE, BENJAMIN P

3665 Ex Parte Dwyer et al 11/112,796 O’NEILL 103(a) HONEYWELL/IFL EXAMINER NGUYEN, CHUONG P

3682 Ex Parte Koether et al 11/156,862 CRAWFORD 103(a) EDWARDS ANGELL PALMER & DODGE LLP EXAMINER ALVAREZ, RAQUEL

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3742 Ex Parte Koch 10/477,301 HORNER 103(a) COLLARD & ROE, P.C. EXAMINER PAIK, SANG YEOP


AFFIRMED-IN-PART

1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1616 Ex Parte Kostansek et al 11/131,615 McCOLLUM 103(a) CHUI, MEI PING ROHM AND HAAS COMPANY EXAMINER CHUI, MEI PING

2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2818 Ex Parte Lester et al 11/197,010 RUGGIERO 102(b)/102(e)/103(a) Kathy Manke Avago Technologies Limited EXAMINER TAYLOR, EARL N

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3635 Ex Parte Hasse 10/987,654 BAHR 102(b)/103(a) NGUYEN, CHI Q Hasse & Nesbitt LLC EXAMINER
NGUYEN, CHI Q

REEXAMINATION

EXAMINER AFFIRMED-IN-PART

3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU)
Ex parte MacDERMID PRINTING SOLUTIONS, LLC Appellant 90/008,004 6,966,259 ROBERTSON 102(b)/103(a) FOR PATENT OWNER: JOHN L. CORDANI CARMODY & TORRANCE, LLP FOR THIRD-PARTY REQUESTER: MICHAEL S. MARCUS, ESQ. DICKSTEIN SHARPIRO LLP EXAMINER PEIKARI, BEHZAD

REISSUE

EXAMINER AFFIRMED

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3676 Ex Parte Goode 10/345,836 6,173,769 BAHR 251 GARDERE WYNNE SEWELL LLP EXAMINER BATES, ZAKIYA W

AFFIRMED

1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1616 Ex Parte Hong 10/038,312 LUCAS 103(a) THE FARRELL LAW FIRM, P.C. EXAMINER LEE, TING ZHOU

1618 Ex Parte Bolle et al 10/515,698 SCHEINER 103(a)/nonstatutory double patenting NATH & ASSOCIATES PLLC EXAMINER DICKINSON, PAUL W

Nevertheless, as the Examiner correctly points out, the fact “[t]hat both applications share a common filing date is not a grounds for withdrawing a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection” (Ans. 9). See 37 C.F.R. § 1.321(c)(3). Even if patents granted on the two applications were set to expire on the same date, unjustified timewise extension is not the only concern addressed by the judicially created doctrine of obviousness-type double patenting. “[T]here is a second justification for obviousness-type double patenting - harassment by multiple assignees.” In re Fallaux, 564 F.3d 1313, 1319, (Fed. Cir. 2009).

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1764 Ex Parte Li et al 11/690,713 MILLS 112(1)/103(a) Matheson Keys Garsson & Kordzik PLLC EXAMINER LEE, DORIS L

1796 Ex Parte Gronsveld et al 11/041,554 WALSH 103(a) ROBERT A. KENT EXAMINER TOSCANO, ALICIA

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2172 Ex Parte Tanner 11/120,027 FREDMAN 103(a)/nonstatutory obviousness type double patenting THE PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY EXAMINER FISHER, ABIGAIL L

2173 Ex Parte Ubillos 11/652,277 DESHPANDE 102(e) APPLE INC./BSTZ BLAKELY SOKOLOFF TAYLOR & ZAFMAN LLP EXAMINER PILLAI, NAMITHA

2196 Ex Parte Kataoka 10/632,178 MACDONALD 103(a) CAREY, RODRIGUEZ, GREENBERG & PAUL, LLP STEVEN M. GREENBERG EXAMINER CAO, DIEM K

2400 Networking, Mulitplexing, Cable, and Security
2443 Ex Parte Jordan 10/337,137 GONSALVES 103(a) AT&T Legal Department - PIP Law LLC EXAMINER NGUYEN, PHUOC H

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3653 Ex Parte Jordan et al 11/372,312 GREENHUT 103(a) KLEIN, O'NEILL & SINGH, LLP EXAMINER BUTLER, MICHAEL E

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3776 Ex Parte Polesuk 10/072,528 LEBOVITZ 103(a) Philip M. Weiss, Esq. Weiss & Weiss EXAMINER DOAN, ROBYN KIEU

The ultimate determination of whether an invention is obvious is a legal question based on the totality of the evidence. Richardson-Vicks, Inc. v. The Upjohn Co., 122 F.3d 1476, 1483 (Fed. Cir. 1997).

Richardson-Vicks, Inc. v. The Upjohn Co., 122 F.3d 1476, 44 USPQ2d 1181 (Fed. Cir. 1997). . . . . . 716.01(d)

3782 Ex Parte Chertkow et al 11/063,058 HOELTER 103(a)/112(1) FULWIDER PATTON LLP EXAMINER PASCUA, JES F


Further, Bayer Schering Pharma AG v. Barr Laboratories, Inc., 575 F.3d 1341, 1347 (Fed. Cir. 2009) provides that it is obvious to try a compound from a finite and easily traversed number of options that were narrowed down from a larger set of possibilities by the prior art.

REHEARING

1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1615 Ex Parte Bedoukian 10/949,129 PRATS 103(a) George W. Rauchfuss, Jr. Ohlandt, Greeley, Ruggiero & Perle, L.L.P. EXAMINER BARHAM, BETHANY P


NEW

REVERSED

2183 Ex Parte Alsup et al 10/726,902 HUGHES 103(a) MHKKG / GLOBALFOUNDRIES EXAMINER FENNEMA, ROBERT E

2442 Ex Parte Kamdar et al 10/690,125 GONSALVES 103(a) General Motors Corporation c/o REISING ETHINGTON P.C. EXAMINER HAMZA, FARUK

AFFIRMED-IN-PART

3621 Ex Parte Burkholder 11/437,111 FISCHETTI 103(a) TI Law Group EXAMINER OBEID, MAMON A

1763 Ex Parte Durrant 11/188,066 MILLS 103(a) Kunzler Needham Massey & Thorpe EXAMINER ASDJODI, MOHAMMAD REZA

2443 Ex Parte Henrie 11/546,488 POTHIER 103(a) HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY EXAMINER COONEY, ADAM A

3716 Ex Parte Leen et al 11/335,210 BARRETT 103(a) CANTOR FITZGERALD, L.P. EXAMINER DUFFY, DAVID W

AFFIRMED

2492 Ex Parte Brabson et al 10/007,582 ZECHER 102(e) Cuenot, Forsythe & Kim, LLC EXAMINER PAN, JOSEPH T

1616 Ex Parte Edwards et al 11/523,914 WALSH 102(e)/obviousness-type double patenting Elmore Patent Law Group EXAMINER HAGHIGHATIAN, MINA


1626 Ex Parte Fischer et al 11/789,737 ADAMS 103(a) BASF Corporation EXAMINER STOCKTON, LAURA LYNNE

2179 Ex Parte Fu 10/644,948 POTHIER 112(2)/102(b) HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY EXAMINER TRAN, TUYETLIEN T

1628 Ex Parte Holen et al 11/169,512 MILLS 102(b)/103(a) FULBRIGHT & JAWORSKI L.L.P. EXAMINER GEMBEH, SHIRLEY V

2628 Ex Parte Kujawa et al 11/132,124 RUGGIERO 103(a) MOTOROLA SOLUTIONS, INC. EXAMINER HARRISON, CHANTE E

3716 Ex Parte Leen et al 11/335,253 BARRETT obviousness-type double patenting/101/103(a) CANTOR FITZGERALD, L.P. EXAMINER DUFFY, DAVID W

1772 Ex Parte Suganuma et al 10/138,559 PAK 102(b)/103(a) SUGHRUE MION, PLLC EXAMINER HYUN, PAUL SANG HWA

3724 Ex Parte Sussmeier et al 11/286,036 MOHANTY 103(a) PITNEY BOWES INC. EXAMINER PRONE, JASON D

2448 Ex Parte Uliano et al 10/113,544 GONSALVES 112(1)/103(a) Thomas & Karceski, P.C. EXAMINER STRANGE, AARON N

DISMISSED

3684 Ex Parte Pullman 10/159,344 Shaw RCE Davidson, Davidson & Kappel, LLC EXAMINER
MEINECKE DIAZ, SUSANNA M

2629 Ex Parte Simon 11/306,229 SHAW RCE Vedder Price PC EXAMINER BOYD, JONATHAN A

Monday, June 27, 2011

kao, dillon

REVERSED

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2162 Ex Parte Graf 11/192,938 MORGAN 102(b)/102(a) SAP AG c/o BUCKLEY, MASCHOFF & TALWALKAR LLC EXAMINER FLEURANTIN, JEAN B

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3693 Ex Parte Schlecht 10/892,390 PETRAVICK 102(b)/103(a) VINSON & ELKINS, L.L.P. EXAMINER MAGUIRE, LINDSAY M


AFFIRMED-IN-PART

2400 Networking, Mulitplexing, Cable, and Security
2436 Ex Parte Gorelik 10/725,116 MORGAN 103(a) Dr. Victor Gorelik EXAMINER LOUIE, OSCAR A

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3771 Ex Parte Ging et al 11/080,446 SCHEINER 103(a)/obviousness-type double patenting NIXON & VANDERHYE, PC EXAMINER DIXON, ANNETTE FREDRICKA

REEXAMINATION

REHEARING

DENIED

3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU)
ACUSHNET COMPANY Requester and Respondent v. Patents of CALLAWAY GOLF COMPANY Patent Owner and Appellant 95/000,122; 95/000,120; 95/000,121; & 95/000,123 6,506,130 B2; 6,210,293 B1; 6,503,156 B1; & 6,595,873 B2 DELMENDO 103(a) Patent Owner: DOROTHY P. WHELAN FISH & RICHARDSON PC Third-Party Requester: CLINTON H. BRANNON MAYER BROWN LLP

In re Kao, 2011 WL 1832537 * 10 (Fed. Cir. 2011) (“This is not a case where the Board relied on an unknown property of prior art for a teaching. Rather, Maloney’s express teachings render the claimed controlled release oxymorphone formulation obvious, and the claimed ‘food effect’ adds nothing of patentable consequence.”). Further on this point, we think that the following guidance from In re Dillon, 919 F.2d 688, 692-93 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (en banc), is instructive:

This court, in reconsidering this case in banc, reaffirms that structural similarity between claimed and prior art subject matter, proved by combining references or otherwise, where the prior art gives reason or motivation to make the claimed compositions, creates a prima facie case of obviousness, and that the burden (and opportunity) then falls on an applicant to rebut that prima facie case. Such rebuttal or argument can consist of a comparison of test data showing that the claimed compositions possess unexpectedly improved properties or properties that the prior art does not have . . . . There is no question that all evidence of the properties of the claimed compositions and the prior art must be considered in determining the ultimate question of patentability, but it is also clear that the discovery that a claimed composition possesses a property not disclosed for the prior art subject matter, does not by itself defeat a prima facie case.

Dillon, In re, 919 F.2d 688, 16 USPQ2d 1897 (Fed. Cir. 1990) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2141, 2144, 2144.09, 2145

REHEARING

DENIED

3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU)
PENTEL CO., LTD. and PENTEL OF AMERICA, LTD. Requester and Respondent v. Patent of BENJAMIN J. KWITEK Patent Owner and Appellant 95/000,399 6,447,190 LEBOVITZ 103(a) FOR PATENT OWNER: LITMAN LAW OFFICES, LTD. FOR THIRD PARTY REQUESTER: ADAMS AND WILKS EXAMINER CLARK, JEANNE MARIE

AFFIRMED

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2179 Ex Parte Gentle 10/667,110 DANG 103(a) SHERIDAN ROSS P.C. EXAMINER TRAN, TUYETLIEN T

2600 Communications
2629 Ex Parte Park et al 10/662,406 WHITEHEAD, JR. 102(b)/103(a) KED & ASSOCIATES, LLP EXAMINER SHERMAN, STEPHEN G

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3636 Ex Parte Jaranson et al 11/530,067 BAHR 102(b)/103(a) EXAMINER DUNN, DAVID R

3687 Ex Parte Watson et al 10/555,914 KIM 102(b)/103(a) CHRISTOPHER & WEISBERG, P.A. EXAMINER CRAWLEY, TALIA F


NEW

REVERSED

1767 Ex Parte Borke et al 11/717,944 MILLS 103(a) LyondellBasell Industries EXAMINER HEINCER, LIAM J

AFFIRMED-IN-PART

2812 Ex Parte Tsakalakos et al 10/273,926 HAHN 103(a) CANTOR COLBURN LLP EXAMINER MULPURI, SAVITRI

AFFIRMED

2816 Ex Parte Chan et al 11/054,310 SAADAT 103(a) Richard Lau INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORPORATION EXAMINER TRA, ANH QUAN

1644 Ex Parte Goldenberg et al 11/534,124 FREDMAN 112(1)/102(b)/103(a) Rossi, Kimms & McDowell LLP EXAMINER SCHWADRON, RONALD B

1761 Ex Parte Johnson et al 10/957,759 MILLS 103(a) AKZO NOBEL INC. EXAMINER DELCOTTO, GREGORY R

2629 Ex Parte Kambayashi 11/068,144 SAADAT 103(a) BAKER BOTTS L.L.P. EXAMINER PERVAN, MICHAEL

2182 Ex Parte Klein 10/424,206 HUGHES 102(e) Dorsey & Whitney LLP-IP Dept.-MTI EXAMINER PARK, ILWOO

1641 Ex Parte Rosenstein et al 11/117,825 FREDMAN 103(a) HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY EXAMINER DO, PENSEE T

DISMISSED

2117 Ex Parte Dubey 11/437,420 Shaw new ground of rejection SEED INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW GROUP PLLC EXAMINER NGUYEN, STEVE N

Friday, June 24, 2011

diamond2, sterling, miller, gulack, ngai

REVERSED

1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1616 Ex Parte Slungaard et al 10/427,271 GRIMES 103(a) TAROLLI, SUNDHEIM, COVELL & TUMMINO L.L.P. EXAMINER SCHLIENTZ, NATHAN W

1641 Ex Parte Chandler et al 11/027,652 WALSH 103(a) DAFFER MCDANIEL LLP EXAMINER DO, PENSEE T

AFFIRMED-IN-PART

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2111 Ex Parte Saha et al 11/392,381 BLANKENSHIP 103(a) TROP, PRUNER & HU, P.C. EXAMINER ZAMAN, FAISAL M

REEXAMINATION

REHEARING DENIED

3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU)
3673 MODEC INTERNATIONAL, LLC Requester and Respondent v. Patent of AKER KVAERNER ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY AS Patent Owner and Appellant 95/000,414 6,851,894 LEBOVITZ 103(a) WENDEROTH, LIND & PONACK, LLP FOR THIRD-PARTY REQUESTER: ANDREWS KURTH, LLP EXAMINER DAWSON, GLENN K original EXAMINER SAFAVI, MICHAEL


AFFIRMED

1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1616 Ex Parte Latorse et al 10/553,363 WALSH 102(e)/103(a) 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 103(a) OSTROLENK FABER GERB & SOFFEN EXAMINER PRYOR, ALTON NATHANIEL

See e.g., In re Diamond, 360 F.2d 214, 217 (CCPA 1966) (affirming obviousness where the evidence showed that synergy was expected because combined drugs targeted different cellular mechanisms, and no evidence to the contrary was produced).

1619 Ex Parte Bush 10/759,970 HASTINGS 103(a) MILES & STOCKBRIDGE PC MAGINOT, MOORE & BECK LLP EXAMINER TUROCY, DAVID P

1628 Ex Parte Rau 11/263,976 ADAMS 103(a)/obviousness-type double patenting 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 103(a) Steven B. Kelber Berenato & White, LLC EXAMINER GEMBEH, SHIRLEY V

1657 Ex Parte Doyle et al 11/701,848 GREEN 102(b) JONES DAY EXAMINER GITOMER, RALPH J

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1717 Ex Parte Bergeron 12/003,735 GREEN 102(b) MILES & STOCKBRIDGE PC EXAMINER JAGOE, DONNA A

1722 Ex Parte Lungu 11/296,902 TIMM 103(a) E I DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY EXAMINER WALKE, AMANDA C

2184 Ex Parte Baugher et al 11/299,916 BLANKENSHIP 103(a) Chrysler Group LLC EXAMINER SNYDER, STEVEN G

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3716 Ex Parte Fiden et al 10/428,516 GREENHUT 103(a) NIXON PEABODY LLP EXAMINER
RADA, ALEX P

3728 Ex Parte Charng 10/887,911 SPAHN 102(b) BERENATO & WHITE, LLC EXAMINER BUI, LUAN KIM


[P]atentability cannot be predicated on printing alone. In re Sterling, 70 F.2d 910, 912 (CCPA 1934).

Printed matter can patentability distinguish a claimed invention from the prior art when the critical question of whether there exists any new and unobvious functional relationship between the claimed printed matter and the claimed substrate is answered in the affirmative. In re Miller, 418 F.2d 1392, 1396 (CCPA 1969); In re Gulack, 703 F.2d 1381, 1386 (Fed. Cir. 1983); and In re Ngai, 367 F.3d 1336, 1338 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (“The PTO has the better argument”).


Miller, In re, 418 F.2d 1392, 164 USPQ 46 (CCPA 1969) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 706.03(a)

Gulack, In re, 703 F.2d 1381, 217 USPQ 401 (Fed. Cir. 1983) . . . . . . . . . . .2106.01, 2112.01

Ngai, In re, 367 F.3d 1336, 70 USPQ2d 1862 (Fed. Cir. 2004) . . . . . . . . . . 2106.01, 2112.01

NEW

REVERSED

1781 Ex Parte Ammann et al 10/564,452 GREEN 103(a) K&L Gates LLP EXAMINER GWARTNEY, ELIZABETH A

1765 Ex Parte Nguyen 11/732,389 TIMM 103(a) ROBERT A. KENT EXAMINER KUGEL, TIMOTHY J

AFFIRMED-IN-PART

1623 Ex Parte Bostrom et al 10/582,308 WALSH 102(b)/103(a) AKZO NOBEL INC. EXAMINER BLAND, LAYLA D

2628 Ex Parte Han et al 10/957,032 HAHN 102(a)/103(a) LEXMARK INTERNATIONAL, INC. EXAMINER RICHER, AARON M

3626 Ex Parte Logue 11/013,927 FISCHETTI 103(a) FOLEY AND LARDNER LLP EXAMINER
REYES, REGINALD R

AFFIRMED

3627 Ex Parte Ames et al 10/842,758 KIM 103(a) HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY EXAMINER HAIDER, FAWAAD

2492 Ex Parte Brabson et al 10/007,581 ZECHER 103(a) Cuenot, Forsythe & Kim, LLC EXAMINER PAN, JOSEPH T

3731 Ex Parte Kantor et al 10/827,819 CALVE 102(b)/103(a) MEDTRONIC VASCULAR, INC. EXAMINER SEVERSON, RYAN J

2444 Ex Parte Wilding et al 10/401,413 CHEN 102(e) IBM CORP (YA) EXAMINER BAYARD, DJENANE M

Thursday, June 23, 2011

jones

REVERSED

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1736 Ex Parte Tsujimichi et al 10/625,272 KRATZ 102(e)/103(a) CARRIER BLACKMAN AND ASSOCIATES EXAMINER JOHNSON, EDWARD M

1782 Ex Parte Maruyama et al 10/837,782 NAGUMO Concurring WARREN 103(a) ANTONELLI, TERRY, STOUT & KRAUS, LLP EXAMINER PATTERSON, MARC A

The Federal Circuit flatly rejected such an analysis in the context of obviousness in In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 350 (Fed. Cir. 1992) (“We decline to extract from Merck the rule that the Solicitor appears to suggest—that regardless of how broad, a disclosure of a chemical genus renders obvious any species that happens to fall within it.”). A reference that does not adequately support obviousness will not suffice to support a demonstration of anticipation. It is not unusual for improved properties to be discovered within a previously disclosed range of a composition.

Jones, In re, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992) . . . 707.07(f), 2143.01, 2144, 2144.05, 2144.08

1782 Ex Parte Nehls et al 10/681,649 NAGUMO 103(a) FITCH EVEN TABIN & FLANNERY EXAMINER THAKUR, VIREN A

1796 Ex Parte Glorioso et al 10/478,568 WARREN 112(1)/112(2)/102(b)/103(a) VOLPE AND KOENIG, P.C. EXAMINER COONEY, JOHN M

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2179 Ex Parte Lyle et al 10/881,842 DILLON 103(a) IBM LOTUS & RATIONAL SW c/o GUERIN & RODRIGUEZ EXAMINER LO, WEILUN

2185 Ex Parte Bailey et al 10/624,808 STEPHENS 103(a) MARTIN & ASSOCIATES, LLC EXAMINER DOAN, DUC T

2400 Networking, Mulitplexing, Cable, and Security
2478 Ex Parte Neuwald et al 10/628,254 MORGAN 102(e)/103(a) AT & T LEGAL DEPARTMENT - GB EXAMINER BRUCKART, BENJAMIN R

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3634 Ex Parte Berger 10/822,079 SPAHN 102(b)/103(a) 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 112(2) Sanchelima and Associates, P.A. Jesus Sanchelima, Esq. EXAMINER JOHNSON, BLAIR M

3634 Ex Parte Gillen 10/781,395 KAUFFMAN 102(b)/103(a) MARSHALL & MELHORN, LLC EXAMINER REDMAN, JERRY E

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3742 Ex Parte Mueller et al 11/234,145 KERINS 103(a) CROWELL & MORING LLP EXAMINER RALIS, STEPHEN J

3743 Ex Parte Potgieter et al 10/718,351 SAINDON 112(2)/102(b)/103(a) MARK O. LOFTIN EXAMINER BASICHAS, ALFRED

AFFIRMED-IN-PART

1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1625 Ex Parte Hancke Orozco et al 10/516,500 GRIMES 102(b) PHARMACEUTICAL PATENT ATTORNEYS, LLC EXAMINER RAHMANI, NILOOFAR

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2188 Ex Parte Van Doren et al 10/760,813 LUCAS 103(a) HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY EXAMINER CHERY, MARDOCHEE

2188 Ex Parte Tierney et al 10/760,652 LUCAS 103(a) HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY EXAMINER CHERY, MARDOCHEE

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3679 Ex Parte Kishi et al 11/230,567 STAICOVICI 102(e) ANTONELLI, TERRY, STOUT & KRAUS, LLP EXAMINER BINDA, GREGORY JOHN

REEXAMINATION

EXAMINER AFFIRMED

3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU)
3617 VOLVO PENTA OF THE AMERICAS, INC. Requester and Respondent v. BRUNSWICK CORPORATION Patent Owner and Appellant 95/000,346 6,234,853 COCKS 102(b)/103(a) Patent Owner: William D. Lanyi Mercury Marine Division of Brunswick Third Party Requester: Harold R. Brown III, Esq. WRB-IPLLP EXAMINER WEHNER, CARY ELLEN original EXAMINER SOTELO, JESUS D

AFFIRMED

1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1627 Ex Parte Aberg 11/474,154 GRIMES 103(a) Nields, Lemack & Frame, LLC EXAMINER RAMACHANDRAN, UMAMAHESWARI

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1729 Ex Parte Colbert 10/625,624 HASTINGS 103(a) BUCHANAN, INGERSOLL & ROONEY PC EXAMINER RUDDOCK, ULA CORINNA

1786 Ex Parte Chhabra et al 10/712,239 GUEST 102(b)/103(a) THE PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY EXAMINER MATZEK, MATTHEW D

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2178 Ex Parte Jaeger 10/953,053 BARRY 103(a) WILSON & HAM EXAMINER VAUGHN, GREGORY J

2400 Networking, Mulitplexing, Cable, and Security
2443 Ex Parte Laux et al 10/301,314 BAUMEISTER 102(e) MARSH FISCHMANN & BREYFOGLE LLP EXAMINER NGUYEN, PHUOC H

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3654 Ex Parte Oh et al 10/561,559 BROWN 103(a) Theodore W Olds Carlson Gaskey & Olds EXAMINER KRUER, STEFAN

3674 Ex Parte Taguchi 11/797,690 SAINDON 103(a) KANESAKA BERNER AND PARTNERS LLP EXAMINER PICKARD, ALISON K

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3721 Ex Parte Turner et al 10/827,465 BAHR 103(a) HARNESS, DICKEY & PIERCE, P.L.C. EXAMINER CHUKWURAH, NATHANIEL C


NEW

REVERSED

1777 Ex Parte Bothe et al 11/814,642 HANLON 103(a) OBLON, SPIVAK, MCCLELLAND MAIER & NEUSTADT, L.L.P. EXAMINER ZALASKY, KATHERINE M

2474 Ex Parte Forissier et al 10/901,138 HOFF 102(e)/103(a) HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY EXAMINER RIYAMI, ABDULLA A

2182 Ex Parte Hofstee et al 10/697,903 HOMERE 103(a) IBM CORPORATION- AUSTIN (JVL) EXAMINER HASSAN, AURANGZEB

1741 Ex Parte Iguchi et al 10/802,837 HASTINGS 103(a) SUGHRUE MION, PLLC EXAMINER LAZORCIK, JASON L

1618 Ex Parte Whitbourne et al 09/834,307 ADAMS 103(a) ANGIOTECH EXAMINER YOUNG, MICAH PAUL

AFFIRMED-IN-PART

1774 Ex Parte Hunsinger et al 11/362,588 GARRIS 103(a) Klaus J. Bach EXAMINER YOUNG, NATASHA E

3711 Ex Parte Rigoli 11/023,074 KAUFFMAN 112(2)/102(b)/103(a) 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 112(2) Bay State IP, LLC EXAMINER CHAMBERS, MICHAEL S


REEXAM

2818 Ex parte LIZY KURIAN JOHN 90/008,853 5,867,422 SIU 102(b) Patent Owner VENABLE, CAMPILLO, LOGAN & MEANEY, P.C. Third Party Requester MARK L. BECKER LATTICE SEMICONDUCTOR CORP.EXAMINER NGUYEN, LINH M original EXAMINER FEARS, TERRELL W

AFFIRMED

2191 Ex Parte Fay et al 10/917,726 COURTENAY 103(a) Agilent Technologies, Inc. in care of: CPA Global EXAMINER RAMPURIA, SATISH

2184 Ex Parte Gregorcyk 10/279,484 DROESCH 103(a) HAMILTON & TERRILE, LLP EXAMINER MAMO, ELIAS

1731 Ex Parte Shanholtz et al 10/870,889 KRATZ 102(b)/103(a) ATK c/o Vidas, Arrett & Steinkraus, P.A. EXAMINER FELTON, AILEEN BAKER

2625 Ex Parte Vilanova et al 10/371,957 FRAHM 112(1)/102(e)/103(a) HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY EXAMINER ZHENG, JACKY X

Wednesday, June 22, 2011

KCJ, hilton

REVERSED

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1786 Ex Parte Weller 11/187,741 OWENS 103(a) 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 103(a) Calfee, Halter & Griswold LLP EXAMINER SALVATORE, LYNDA

2600 Communications
2613 Ex Parte Li et al 10/465,750 KRIVAK 103(a) TROP, PRUNER & HU, P.C. EXAMINER BELLO, AGUSTIN

2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2818 Ex Parte Choi 10/864,870 WHITEHEAD, JR. 102(b)/103(a) HARNESS, DICKEY & PIERCE, P.L.C. EXAMINER NGUYEN, THINH T

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3632 Ex Parte Tam et al 10/800,293 SPAHN 102(b)/103(a) GREER, BURNS & CRAIN, LTD. EXAMINER MARSH, STEVEN M

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3711 Ex Parte Sato et al 11/429,320 HORNER 103(a) SUGHRUE MION, PLLC EXAMINER GORDEN, RAEANN

3741 Ex Parte Wood 10/443,324 HORNER 103(a) THE BLACK & DECKER CORPORATION EXAMINER DWIVEDI, VIKANSHA S

3742 Ex Parte Ciancimino et al 11/041,634 GREENHUT 103(a) WHIRLPOOL PATENTS COMPANY - MD 0750 EXAMINER PAIK, SANG YEOP

AFFIRMED-IN-PART

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2172 Ex Parte Barbee et al 11/189,191 COURTENAY 101/102(e) 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 112(2) STEVEN M. GREENBERG CAREY, RODRIGUEZ, GREENBERG & PAUL, LLP EXAMINER SONG, DAEHO D

2400 Networking, Mulitplexing, Cable, and Security
2434 Ex Parte Della-Libera et al 11/254,519 DROESCH 102(e) 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 102(e) WORKMAN NYDEGGER/MICROSOFT EXAMINER HOMAYOUNMEHR, FARID

2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2885 Ex Parte Burkum et al 11/198,101 HOFF 102(e)/103(a) HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY EXAMINER LEE, JONG SUK

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3734 Ex Parte Ortiz et al 11/197,528 GREENHUT 102(b)/103(a) WELSH FLAXMAN & GITLER LLC EXAMINER BACHMAN, LINDSEY MICHELE

REEXAMINATION

EXAMINER AFFIRMED-IN-PART; REVERSED-IN-PART; 37 C.F.R. § 41.77(b)

3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU)
2874 PANDUIT CORPORATION Requester and Cross-Appellant v. Patent of ADC TELECOMMUNICATIONS Patent Owner and Respondent 95/000,415 6,925,242 LEBOVITZ 102(b)/103(a)/112(2) 37 C.F.R. § 41.77(b) FOR PATENT OWNER: MERCHANT & GOULD, P.C. FOR THIRD-PARTY REQUESTER: OLIFF & BERRIDGE, PLC EXAMINER ENGLISH, PETER C original EXAMINER PALMER, PHAN T H

EXAMINER AFFIRMED

3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU)
2874 PANDUIT CORPORATION Requester and Cross-Appellant v. Patent of ADC TELECOMMUNICATIONS Patent Owner and Respondent 95/000,413 7,167,625 LEBOVITZ 102(e)/103(a) FOR PATENT OWNER: Karen A. Fitzsimmons MERCHANT & GOULD, P.C. FOR THIRD-PARTY REQUESTER: OLIFF & BERRIDGE, PLC original EXAMINER LEE, JOHN D

EXAMINER AFFIRMED-IN-PART; REVERSED-IN-PART

3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU)
2874 PANDUIT CORPORATION Requester and Cross-Appellant v. Patent of ADC TELECOMMUNICATIONS Patent Owner and Respondent 95/000,412 6,868,220 LEBOVITZ 102(b)/103(a)/112(2) FOR PATENT OWNER: MERCHANT & GOULD, P.C. FOR THIRD-PARTY REQUESTER: OLIFF & BERRIDGE, PLC EXAMINER ENGLISH, PETER C original EXAMINER PALMER, PHAN T H

AFFIRMED

1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1657 Ex Parte Kuklinski et al 10/511,882 WALSH 103(a) FULBRIGHT & JAWORSKI L.L.P. EXAMINER SCHUBERG, LAURA J

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1725 Ex Parte Gaudiana et al 10/723,554 OWENS 103(a) FISH & RICHARDSON P.C. (BO) EXAMINER TRINH, THANH TRUC

1784 Ex Parte Mellott et al 11/284,424 OWENS 103(a) NIXON & VANDERHYE, PC EXAMINER LANGMAN, JONATHAN C

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2111 Ex Parte Tsai et al 11/433,195 DANG 112(2)/102(b)/102(e)/103(a) J.C. Patents EXAMINER CLEARY, THOMAS J

2175 Ex Parte Mingot et al 10/557,397 ZECHER 103(a) Robert D. Shedd, Patent Operations THOMSON Licensing LLC EXAMINER ZAHR, ASHRAF A

2400 Networking, Mulitplexing, Cable, and Security
2443 Ex Parte Knittel et al 10/780,833 MORGAN 103(a) WALL & TONG, LLP/ALCATEL-LUCENT USA INC. EXAMINER BELANI, KISHIN G

2600 Communications
2612 Ex Parte Jones 11/274,665 KRIVAK 102(b)/103(a) THOMAS, KAYDEN, HORSTEMEYER & RISLEY, LLP EXAMINER SWARTHOUT, BRENT

2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2836 Ex Parte Kunow et al 10/489,573 RUGGIERO 102(b)/103(a) CONLEY ROSE, P.C. David A. Rose EXAMINER KAPLAN, HAL IRA

See KCJ Corp. v. Kinetic Concepts, Inc., 223 F.3d 1351, 1356 (Fed. Cir. 2000)(“This court has repeatedly emphasized that an indefinite article "a‟ or "an‟ in patent parlance carries the meaning of "one or more‟ in openended claims containing the transitional phrase "comprising.‟ [citations omitted.]”).

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3711 Ex Parte Smith 11/958,382 KIM 102(b)/103(a) HARNESS, DICKEY, & PIERCE, P.L.C EXAMINER BALDORI, JOSEPH B


Compare Ex parte Hilton, 148 USPQ 356, 356-57 (Bd. App. 1965) (claims were directed to fried potato chips with a specified moisture and fat content, whereas the prior art was directed to french fries having a higher moisture content. While recognizing that in some cases the particular shape of a product is of no patentable significance, the Board held in this case the shape (chips) is important because it results in a product which is distinct from the reference product (french fries)).

Hilton, Ex parte, 148 USPQ 356 (Bd. App. 1965). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2144.04

REISSUE

EXAMINER AFFIRMED

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3731 Ex Parte Lechot 10/431,450 6,238,398 KAUFFMAN 102(b) Greatbatch Ltd. EXAMINER NGUYEN, VI X


NEW

REVERSED

1617
Ex Parte Brillouet et al
11/483,903 WALSH 102(b)/103(a) JOHNSON & JOHNSON EXAMINER SOROUSH, ALI

2163 Ex Parte Hillebrand 10/524,655 COURTENAY 102(b)/103(a) Leydig, Voit & Mayer, Ltd. (Frankfurt office) EXAMINER NGUYEN, KIM T

2471 Ex Parte Hruska 10/253,092 BAUMEISTER 103(a) 37 CFR 41.50(b) 112(2) Werner Ulrich EXAMINER WONG, WARNER

1724 Ex Parte Hwang 11/324,344 OWENS 102(b)/103(a) EXAMINER BERMAN, JASON

AFFIRMED

3663 Ex Parte Akers et al 11/106,871 O’NEILL 103(a) TUROCY & WATSON, LLP EXAMINER PALABRICA, RICARDO J

2837 Ex Parte Babb et al 10/830,660 KOHUT Concurring-In-Part BAUMEISTER 102(b)/103(a) HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY EXAMINER GLASS, ERICK DAVID

2478 Ex Parte Berstis et al 11/044,569 DILLON 103(a) IBM CORPORATION (RVW) EXAMINER BRUCKART, BENJAMIN R

3689 Ex Parte Brice et al 10/464,180 FISCHETTI 102(e) Alston & Bird LLP EXAMINER
MOONEYHAM, JANICE A

2434 Ex Parte Della-Libera et al 10/068,444 DROESCH 102(b)/103(a) WORKMAN NYDEGGER/MICROSOFT EXAMINER HOMAYOUNMEHR, FARID

2452 Ex Parte Fank et al 10/658,139 SMITH 102(e)/103(a) MCANDREWS HELD & MALLOY, LTD EXAMINER HOANG, HIEU T

1722 Ex Parte Hada et al 10/547,632 OWENS 103(a) KNOBBE MARTENS OLSON & BEAR LLP EXAMINER JOHNSON, CONNIE P

2471 Ex Parte LeBlanc 10/077,405 MACDONALD 102(b)/103(a) MCANDREWS HELD & MALLOY, LTD EXAMINER WONG, WARNER

2166 Ex Parte Motoyama et al 10/460,404 COURTENAY 103(a) OBLON, SPIVAK, MCCLELLAND MAIER & NEUSTADT, L.L.P. EXAMINER HARPER, ELIYAH STONE

1763 Ex Parte Roesler et al 11/198,734 GRIMES 103(a) BAYER MATERIAL SCIENCE LLC EXAMINER CANO, MILTON I