SEARCH

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

Wednesday, August 31, 2011

klein, mapelsden, johnson

REVERSED

1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1628 Ex Parte Dente et al
11/600,401 MILLS 103(a) FISH & RICHARDSON P.C. (BO) EXAMINER SZNAIDMAN, MARCOS L

The Board must provide sound reasoning and substantial evidence to support a finding of analogous art,
such as solving a similar problem. In re Klein, 98 USPQ2d 1991, 1993 (Fed. Cir. 2011).

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1716 Ex Parte Ni et al 11/467,449 COLAIANNI 103(a) LOWE HAUPTMAN HAM & BERNER, LLP EXAMINER ALEJANDRO MULERO, LUZ L

1721 Ex Parte Marcello et al 11/187,030 COLAIANNI 103(a) OLIFF & BERRIDGE, PLC. EXAMINER ZHANG, RACHEL L

1731 Ex Parte Noland et al 10/917,188 KRATZ 103(a) MARSH, FISCHMANN & BREYFOGLE LLP EXAMINER SMITH, JENNIFER A

1765 Ex Parte Gaddy et al 10/956,528 COLAIANNI 103(a) NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION EXAMINER HAIDER, SAIRA BANO

1784 Ex Parte Serra et al 11/553,568 ROBERTSON 103(a) 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 103(a) BARNES & THORNBURG LLP EXAMINER KRUPICKA, ADAM C

1784 Ex Parte Solomon et al 11/147,881 CRAWFORD 103(a) BARNES & THORNBURG LLP EXAMINER KRUPICKA, ADAM C

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2158 Ex Parte Driesch et al 11/207,055 DANG 103(a) WOOD, HERRON & EVANS, L.L.P. (IBM) EXAMINER RUIZ, ANGELICA

2171 Ex Parte Orsolini et al 11/112,136 HUGHES 102(b)/103(a) HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY EXAMINER SALOMON, PHENUEL S

2400 Networking, Mulitplexing, Cable, and Security
2431 Ex Parte Ishigaki et al 10/568,513 STEPHENS 102(e)/103(a) SCHMEISER, OLSEN & WATTS EXAMINER AVERY, JEREMIAH L

2451 Ex Parte Lee 10/696,148 SAADAT 102(e) MITEL NETWORKS CORPORATION EXAMINER WALSH, JOHN B

2452 Ex Parte Yamamoto 10/170,756 DROESCH 103(a) 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 101 IBM CORPORATION EXAMINER WIDHALM, ANGELA M

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3772 Ex Parte Michelson 10/371,757 McCARTHY 103(a) MARTIN & FERRARO, LLP EXAMINER BROWN, MICHAEL A

AFFIRMED-IN-PART

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1778 Ex Parte Roberts et al 11/119,907 COLAIANNI 103(a) MEREK, BLACKMON & VOORHEES, LLC EXAMINER SAVAGE, MATTHEW O

In re Mapelsden, 329 F.2d 321, 322 (CCPA 1964) (stating that “[t]he issue [in determining obviousness] lies in what the combination of references makes obvious to the person of ordinary skill and not whether a feature of one reference can be bodily incorporated in the other to produce the subject matter claimed”).

1783 Ex Parte Kornfalt et al 10/581,261 PAK 102(b)/103(a) NOVAK, DRUCE + QUIGG L.L.P. - PERGO EXAMINER O'HERN, BRENT T

REEXAMINATION

EXAMINER AFFIRMED-IN-PART

3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU)
2153 Ex Parte 6687746 et al 90/010,012 09/386,529 TURNER 103(a) FOR PATENT OWNER: STERNE, KESSLER, GOLDSTEIN & FOX P.L.L.C. FOR THE THIRD PARTY REQUESTOR: Richard D. McLeod Electronic Frontier Foundation EXAMINER WOOD, WILLIAM H original EXAMINER CHOUDHARY, ANITA

EXAMINER REVERSED

3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU)
3304 Ex Parte 4944514 et al 90/007,015 07/283,863 SONG 103(a) For Patent Owner: VOLPE AND KOENIG, P.C. For Third Party Requester: 3M Innovative Properties Company EXAMINER FLANAGAN, BEVERLY MEINDL original EXAMINER CHIU, RALEIGH W

EXAMINER AFFIRMED

3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU)
3651 Ex Parte 7210573 et al 90/009,221 90/011,997 10/505,063 ROBERTSON 103(a) FOR PATENT OWNER: MCGARRY BAIR PC FOR THIRD-PARTY REQUESTER: NIXON & VANDERHYE, PC EXAMINER FOSTER, JIMMY G original EXAMINER BIDWELL, JAMES R

AFFIRMED

1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1612 Ex Parte Radhakrishnan et al 11/346,442 WALSH 103(a) KENYON & KENYON LLP EXAMINER KISHORE, GOLLAMUDI S

1617 Ex Parte Burke 11/897,291 WALSH 103(a) USDA-ARS-OFFICE OF TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER NATIONAL CTR FOR AGRICULTURAL UTILIZATION RESEARCH EXAMINER
BROWN, COURTNEY A

1645 Ex Parte Eberz et al 10/486,187 LEBOVITZ 103(a) Baker Donelson Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, PC EXAMINER SHAHNAN SHAH, KHATOL S

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1732 Ex Parte Mihan et al 10/588,390 PAK 102(b) DILWORTH IP, LLC EXAMINER NGUYEN, COLETTE B

1736 Ex Parte Cetel 10/023,565 ROBERTSON 112(1)/103(a) Pratt & Whitney EXAMINER SHEEHAN, JOHN P

See In re Johnson, 162 F.2d 924, 928 (CCPA 1947) (“The flakes produced by the Braunbeck process are neither transitory or ephemeral but are by nature tangible and permanent pending the subsequent treatment to which they are subjected.”).

1765 Ex Parte Ganapathiappan 11/069,518 COLAIANNI concurring NAGUMO 102(a,e)/102(b)/103(a)/112(1) HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY EXAMINER BUTTNER, DAVID J

1771 Ex Parte Winemiller et al 11/126,001 KRATZ 103(a) ExxonMobil Research & Engineering Company EXAMINER MCAVOY, ELLEN M

1782 Ex Parte Dawe et al 11/086,105 COLAIANNI 103(a) Sealed Air Corporation EXAMINER WOOD, ELLEN S

1798 Ex Parte Kressner et al 10/325,469 HASTINGS 103(a) DORITY & MANNING, P.A. EXAMINER COLE, ELIZABETH M

1798 Ex Parte Kressner et al 11/165,437 HASTINGS 103(a) DORITY & MANNING, P.A. EXAMINER COLE, ELIZABETH M

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2129 Ex Parte Forman et al 11/080,098 HUGHES 101 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 101 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY EXAMINER STARKS, WILBERT L

2176 Ex Parte Wolska et al 10/713,863 CHANG 103(a) JONES DAY EXAMINER HUTTON JR, WILLIAM D

2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2854 Ex Parte Belanger et al 11/492,553 HOFF 103(a) Davidson, Davidson & Kappel, LLC EXAMINER CULLER, JILL E

2872 Ex Parte Lang et al 11/438,895 WHITEHEAD, JR. 102(b)/103(a) MCNAIR LAW FIRM, P.A. EXAMINER DOAK, JENNIFER L

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3629 Ex Parte Rowse et al 09/683,885 CRAWFORD 103(a) BROOKS KUSHMAN P.C./FGTL EXAMINER OUELLETTE, JONATHAN P

3634 Ex Parte Lutkus et al 10/829,101 ASTORINO 103(a) HARNESS, DICKEY & PIERCE, P.L.C. EXAMINER MITCHELL, KATHERINE W

REHEARING

DENIED

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1723 Ex Parte Voss et al 10/858,656 COLAIANNI 103(a) BASF CORPORATION EXAMINER HANDAL, KAITY V

Tuesday, August 30, 2011

klein

REVERSED

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1715 Ex Parte NARWANKAR et al 10/851,561 FRANKLIN 103(a) Applied Materials, Inc. EXAMINER GAMBETTA, KELLY M

1733 Ex Parte Shimizu et al 10/497,664 SMITH 103(a) McDermott Will & Emery EXAMINER ROE, JESSEE RANDALL

1734 Ex Parte Jones 11/411,858 HANLON 102(a,e,b)/103(a) OBLON, SPIVAK, MCCLELLAND MAIER & NEUSTADT, L.L.P. EXAMINER KOSLOW, CAROL M

1785 Ex Parte Wilde et al 11/194,498 NAGUMO 112(2)/103(a) HARNESS DICKEY & PIERCE, PLC EXAMINER HIGGINS, GERARD T

1786 Ex Parte Collias et al 11/606,821 SMITH 102(a)/103(a)/obviousness-type double patenting THE PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY EXAMINER MATZEK, MATTHEW D

1786 Ex Parte Collias et al 11/606,820 SMITH 102(a)/103(a)/obviousness-type double patenting THE PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY EXAMINER MATZEK, MATTHEW D

1798 Ex Parte Hamann 11/271,005 SMITH 102(b)/103(a) REINHART BOERNER VAN DEUREN P.C. EXAMINER NELSON, MICHAEL B

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2175 Ex Parte Gunasekar et al 10/903,590 HUGHES 103(a) VERIZON EXAMINER TRAN, MYLINH T

2600 Communications
2612 Ex Parte Berthou et al 10/531,081 HAHN 103(a) LOWE HAUPTMAN HAM & BERNER, LLP EXAMINER MCNALLY, KERRI L

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3627 Ex Parte Hahn-Carlson et al 11/120,630 MOHANTY 101/112(2)/103(a) CRAWFORD MAUNU PLLC EXAMINER SHAAWAT, MUSSA A

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3763 Ex Parte Peppel 11/089,183 McCARTHY 102(b)/103(a) KLEIN, O'NEILL & SINGH, LLP EXAMINER VU, QUYNH-NHU HOANG

3767 Ex Parte Babaev 11/536,928 HORNER 103(a) Bacoustics, LLC EXAMINER CARPENTER, WILLIAM R

AFFIRMED-IN-PART

1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1618 Ex Parte Charmot et al 10/814,749 MILLS 103(a) SENNIGER POWERS LLP (ILPS) EXAMINER YOUNG, MICAH PAUL

The Board must provide sound reasoning and substantial evidence to support a finding of analogous art, such as solving a similar problem. In re Klein, 98 USPQ2d 1991 (Fed. Cir. 2011).

2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2826 Ex Parte Yun et al 11/374,644 RUGGIERO 102(b)/103(a) MYERS BIGEL SIBLEY & SAJOVEC EXAMINER KUO, WENSING W

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3677 Ex Parte Rodriguez et al 11/176,531 PATE III 102(b)/103(a) William D. Durkee EXAMINER LAVINDER, JACK W

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3721 Ex Parte Robieu et al 10/711,950 HORNER 103(a) GUDRUN E. HUCKETT DRAUDT EXAMINER CHUKWURAH, NATHANIEL C

REEXAMINATION

EXAMINER AFFIRMED-IN-PART 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 103(a)

3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU)
3651 Ex Parte 6328180 et al 90/010,115 09/172,556 Ex parte Crane Merchandising Systems, Inc. Appellant and Patent Owner TURNER 102(b)/103(a) PATENT OWNER: DOCKET CLERK THIRD-PARTY REQUESTER: PAUL MORICO BAKER BOTTS, L.L.P. EXAMINER JASTRZAB, JEFFREY R original EXAMINER NOLAND, KENNETH W

EXAMINER REVERSED

3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU)
1635 Ex Parte 6103490 et al 90/010,557 08/261,989 Ex parte DANISCO U.S., INC. LEBOVITZ obviousness-type double-patenting FOR PATENT OWNER: ROPES & GRAY, LLP FOR THIRD-PARTY REQUESTER: MICHAEL W. KRENICKY NOVOZYMES NORTH AMERICA, INC. EXAMINER CAMPELL, BRUCE R original EXAMINER SHIBUYA, MARK LANCE

AFFIRMED

1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1621 Ex Parte Letari et al 11/909,287 WALSH 103(a) ROYLANCE, ABRAMS, BERDO & GOODMAN, L.L.P. EXAMINER KATAKAM, SUDHAKAR

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1747 Ex Parte Zhao et al 11/957,423 McKELVEY 103(a) THE GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY EXAMINER FISCHER, JUSTIN R

1762 Ex Parte Yu et al 10/867,146 SMITH 102(b)/103(a) BAYER MATERIAL SCIENCE LLC EXAMINER NILAND, PATRICK DENNIS

1763 Ex Parte Mentak 11/494,911 HANLON 103(a) SQUIRE, SANDERS & DEMPSEY (US) LLP EXAMINER WANG, CHUN CHENG

1783 Ex Parte Kelly 10/889,998 NAGUMO 112(1)/112(2)/103(a) CANTOR COLBURN LLP EXAMINER O'HERN, BRENT T

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2166 Ex Parte Metsatahti et al 10/715,162 DANG 103(a) Nokia Corporation and Alston & Bird LLP EXAMINER SAEED, USMAAN

2168 Ex Parte Gent et al 11/303,048 DANG 103(a) PERKINS COIE LLP EXAMINER MORRISON, JAY A

2192 Ex Parte Roth et al 10/927,859 HUGHES 103(a) HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY EXAMINER YIGDALL, MICHAEL J

2400 Networking, Mulitplexing, Cable, and Security
2443 Ex Parte Riche et al 10/284,080 JEFFERY 102(e) 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 112(2) LADAS & PARRY EXAMINER DENNISON, JERRY B

2451 Ex Parte DeBruine et al 09/814,426 SAADAT 103(a) FlashPoint Technology and Withrow & Terranova EXAMINER DIVECHA, KAMAL B

2600 Communications
2617 Ex Parte Karaoguz et al 11/093,322 HOFF 102(e) MCANDREWS HELD & MALLOY, LTD EXAMINER SABOURI, MAZDA

2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2811 Ex Parte Wirbeleit et al 11/099,755 JEFFERY 112(1)/103(a) WILLIAMS, MORGAN & AMERSON EXAMINER HU, SHOUXIANG

2815 Ex Parte Jung et al 10/969,995 DILLON 103(a) SHERR & VAUGHN, PLLC EXAMINER DIAZ, JOSE R

2815 Ex Parte Artaki et al 10/870,102 ROBERTSON 112(1)/103(a) IP Legal Services EXAMINER LEE, EUGENE

2839 Ex Parte Drescher et al 10/541,723 BAUMEISTER 103(a) Delphi Technologies, Inc. EXAMINER IMAS, VLADIMIR

2874 Ex Parte Whitehead 11/240,400 HAHN 102(e)/103(a) Emcore Corporation EXAMINER RAHLL, JERRY T

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3644 Ex Parte Kusic 11/454,309 MOHANTY 103(a) TOM KUSIC EXAMINER DINH, TIEN QUANG

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3732 Ex Parte Larsen 10/690,421 SPAHN 102(b)/103(a) Thompson E. Fehr EXAMINER LEWIS, RALPH A

3748
Ex Parte Lamb et al 11/535,100 HORNER 103(a) Jerome R. Drouillard EXAMINER DAVIS, MARY ALICE

3763 Ex Parte Weaver et al 10/768,571 SAINDON 103(a) Bingham McCutchen LLP EXAMINER STIGELL, THEODORE J

3768 Ex Parte Mullick et al 11/045,838 ASTORINO 102(b)/103(a) GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY EXAMINER LE, LONG V

Monday, August 29, 2011

bassell

REVERSED

1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1644 Ex Parte Gately et al 10/267,565 WALSH 112(1)/103(a) Leon R.Yankwich,Esq. YANKWICH & ASSOCIATES, P.C. EXAMINER KIM, YUNSOO

1657 Ex Parte Ueda et al 11/315,161 WALSH 103(a) CONNOLLY BOVE LODGE & HUTZ LLP EXAMINER GITOMER, RALPH J

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1762 Ex Parte Hladik et al 11/062,482 MILLS 112(2)/102(b)/103(a) HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY EXAMINER EGWIM, KELECHI CHIDI

AFFIRMED-IN-PART

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1781 Ex Parte Green et al 11/114,453 WALSH 103(a)/obviousness-type double patenting GENERAL MILLS, INC. EXAMINER DEES, NIKKI H


Cf. In re Bassell Poliolefine Italia S.P.A., 547 F.3d 1371, 1378 (Fed. Cir. 2008) (the disclosure of a copending application may be used to learn the meaning of claims and to interpret the coverage of a claim).

AFFIRMED

1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1611 Ex Parte Muraoka et al 10/454,629 GREEN obviousness-type double patenting/103(a) SUGHRUE-265550 EXAMINER GHALI, ISIS A D

1616 Ex Parte Cornes et al 10/560,097 ADAMS 103(a) SYNGENTA CROP PROTECTION , INC. EXAMINER RICHTER, JOHANN R

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1761 Ex Parte Ming et al 11/133,007 PAK 103(a)/obviousness-type double patenting ROBERTS MLOTKOWSKI SAFRAN & COLE, P.C. EXAMINER DELCOTTO, GREGORY R

1764 Ex Parte Arioglu et al 11/199,142 KIMLIN 103(a) IP Authority, LLC Ramraj Soundararajan EXAMINER NGUYEN, TRI V

2400 Networking, Mulitplexing, Cable, and Security
2466 Ex Parte Vu 11/047,264 RUGGIERO 102(b)/103(a) JENKINS, WILSON, TAYLOR & HUNT, P. A. EXAMINER DECKER, CASSANDRA L

2600 Communications
2629 Ex Parte Sowden et al 10/388,757 DILLON 103(a) LOWE HAUPTMAN HAM & BERNER, LLP EXAMINER PERVAN, MICHAEL

2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2893 Ex Parte Datta et al 11/028,378 KRIVAK 112(1)/112(2)/103(a) TROP, PRUNER & HU, P.C. EXAMINER REAMES, MATTHEW L

2895 Ex Parte Zhang et al 11/438,657 HAHN 103(a) GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY EXAMINER RICHARDS, N DREW

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3695 Ex Parte Chandrashekhar et al 10/155,768 FISCHETTI 101/103(a) WALL & TONG, LLP/ALCATEL-LUCENT USA INC. EXAMINER BAIRD, EDWARD J

Friday, August 26, 2011

hoffer, dembiczak, schaefer, collier

REVERSED

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1782 Ex Parte Geisler et al 11/031,557 TIMM 103(a) Charles N.J. Ruggiero, Esq. Ohlandt, Greeley, Ruggiero & Perle, L.L.P. EXAMINER KASHNIKOW, ERIK

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2159 Ex Parte Tan et al 09/873,061 MORGAN dissenting SMITH 102(e) HICKMAN PALERMO TRUONG & BECKER/ORACLE EXAMINER BLACK, LINH

2600 Communications
2625 Ex Parte Kroon et al 10/274,470 RUGGIERO 103(a) Xerox Corporation EXAMINER VO, QUANG N

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3663 Ex Parte Nye et al 11/223,238 GREENHUT 112(1)/112(2)/102(b)/103(a) Bell & Manning, LLC EXAMINER MONDT, JOHANNES P

In Schering Corp. v. Geneva Pharmaceuticals, 339 F. 3d 1373, 1378 (Fed. Cir. 2003), the Court distinguished cases dealing with “accidental, unwitting, and unappreciated” anticipation, Eibel Process Co. v. Minn. & Ontario Paper Co., 261 U.S. 45 (1923) and Tilghman v. Proctor, 102 U.S. 707 (1880), where the record did not conclusively establish that the prior art produced the claimed subject matter, from cases in which the record established that the claimed subject matter necessarily and inevitably was a consequence of practicing a prior art process under the normal, as opposed to hypothetical or unusual, conditions disclosed.

Schering Corp. v. Geneva Pharm. Inc., 339 F.3d 1373, 67 USPQ2d 1664 (Fed. Cir. 2003). . . . . . . . . . . . . 2112

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3749 Ex Parte Brown 10/940,994 SPAHN 103(a) LITMAN LAW OFFICES, LTD. EXAMINER SUERETH, SARAH ELIZABETH
See the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP) § 2111.04 citing Hoffer v. Microsoft Corp., 405 F.3d 1326, 1329 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (When a “‘whereby’ clause states a condition that is material to patentability, it cannot be ignored in order to change the substance of the invention.”).

Hoffer v. Microsoft Corp., 405 F.3d 1326, 74 USPQ2d 1481 (Fed. Cir. 2005) . . . . . . . 2111.04


AFFIRMED-IN-PART

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1781 Ex Parte Green et al 11/114,485 WALSH 103(a) John A. O'Toole EXAMINER DEES, NIKKI H


AFFIRMED

1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1656 Ex Parte Mao et al 11/218,642 McCOLLUM 103(a) BACON & THOMAS, PLLC EXAMINER DESAI, ANAND U

1657 Ex Parte Gurewich et al 11/447,455 GRIMES 103(a) MEDLEN & CARROLL, LLP EXAMINER KOSSON, ROSANNE

The analysis required by § 103 has been characterized as “casting the mind back to the time of invention, to consider the thinking of one of ordinary skill in the art, guided only by the prior art references and the then-accepted wisdom in the field.In re Dembiczak, 175 F.3d 994, 999 (Fed. Cir. 1999) (emphasis added). For this reason, obviousness has been likened to “the creature of an imagination projected upon the future out of materials of the past.” Schaefer, Inc. v. Mohawk Cabinet Co., 276 F.2d 204, 207 (2d Cir. 1960)(Learned Hand, J.). A determination of obviousness is based only on knowledge available at the time the claimed invention was made.

Dembiczak, In re, 175 F.3d 994, 50 USPQ2d 1614 (Fed. Cir. 1999) . . . . . . . . .1504.06, 2144.04

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1726 Ex Parte Takahashi et al 10/369,596 TIMM 103(a) KUBOVCIK & KUBOVCIK EXAMINER APICELLA, KARIE O

Such a recitation of an act that may occur in the future does not positively recite a structural relationship between the battery and the substrate. See In re Collier, 397 F.2d 1003, 1005 (CCPA 1968).

Collier, In re, 397 F.2d 1003, 158 USPQm 266 (CCPA 1968) . . . . . . . 2163, 2163.05, 2172.01, 2173.05(k)

1781 Ex Parte DuBois et al 09/838,809 HANLON 103(a) 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 103(a) FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, GARRETT & DUNNER LLP EXAMINER PADEN, CAROLYN A

Thursday, August 25, 2011

tanaka, wyers, ICON

REVERSED

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1723 Ex Parte Nahas 11/249,814 SMITH 103(a) MCDONNELL BOEHNEN HULBERT & BERGHOFF LLP EXAMINER MERKLING, MATTHEW J

1761 Ex Parte Shendy et al 11/099,075 SMITH 103(a) CURATOLO SIDOTI CO., LPA EXAMINER SZEKELY, PETER A

1764 Ex Parte Liaw et al 11/905,940 SMITH 103(a) Joe McKinney Muncy EXAMINER
HUHN, RICHARD A

1786 Ex Parte Zafiroglu et al 11/364,912 FRANKLIN 103(a) INVISTA NORTH AMERICA S.A.R.L. EXAMINER SALVATORE, LYNDA

2400 Networking, Mulitplexing, Cable, and Security
2454 Ex Parte Fontoura et al 10/152,251 DROESCH 103(a) John L. Rogitz Rogitz & Associates EXAMINER AVELLINO, JOSEPH E

AFFIRMED

1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1651 Ex Parte Baur et al 11/194,333 McCOLLUM 103(a) Henkel Corporation EXAMINER
GOUGH, TIFFANY MAUREEN

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1745 Ex Parte Paulson et al 11/051,125 SMITH 103(a) Hamre, Schumann, Mueller & Larson, P.C. EXAMINER MCCLELLAND, KIMBERLY KEIL

1763 Ex Parte Roby 10/533,041 FRANKLIN 103(a) Tyco Healthcare Group LP d/b/a Covidien EXAMINER LEONARD, MICHAEL L

1783 Ex Parte Kia et al 10/639,306 SMITH 103(a) Harness Dickey & Pierce, P.L.C. EXAMINER SAMPLE, DAVID R

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2177 Ex Parte Dettinger et al 10/787,479 DIXON 103(a) IBM CORPORATION EXAMINER
HILLERY, NATHAN

REHEARING

DENIED-IN-PART, GRANTED-IN-PART

3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU)
1753 Ex Parte 6033542 et al 90/007,824 11/430,299 08/574,693 Ex parte Kobelco Research Institute, Inc., Patent Owner and Appellant ROBERTSON 102/251 FOR PATENT OWNER: Oblon, Spivak, McClelland, Maier & Neustadt, L.L.P. FOR THIRD-PARTY REQUESTER: Gregory S. Rosenblatt Wiggin and Dana, LLP EXAMINER MCDONALD, RODNEY GLENN original EXAMINER MCDONALD, RODNEY GLENN

Thus, because In re Tanaka holds that the addition of dependent claims as a hedge against possible invalidity is within a reasonable interpretation of the reissue statute, we reverse the Examiner’s rejection of claims 1-10 under 35 U.S.C. § 251. Id., at 1251-1252.

DENIED

3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU)
1762 Ex Parte 6709694 et al 95/000,390 09/890,690 SIRONA DENTAL SYSTEMS, INC. Requester v. 3M ESPE AG Patent Owner 3M INNOVATIVE PROPERTIES COMPANY DELMENDO 103(a) PATENT OWNER: PAMELA L. STEWARD, ESQ. 3M INNOVATIVE PROPERTIES COMPANY DORTHY P. WHELAN, ESQ. FISH & RICHARDSON, P.C., P.A. THIRD-PARTY REQUESTER: JOHN D. CARPENTER, ESQ. CHRISTIE PARKER & HALE, LLP EXAMINER STEIN, STEPHEN J original EXAMINER MICHENER, JENNIFER KOLB

Sirona’s reliance on cases such as Wyers v. Master Lock Co., 616 F.3d 1231 (Fed. Cir. 2010) and In re ICON Health and Fitness, Inc., 496 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2007) is misplaced. Those cases involved simple mechanical inventions in which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have reasonably expected that the element in dispute (e.g., the gas spring designed to stably retain a structure in the vertical position as in ICON Health) would serve the same or similar function in either the invention or the prior art.

Wednesday, August 24, 2011

callaway, muchmore

AFFIRMED-IN-PART

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1715 Ex Parte Ivanov et al 11/138,531
DANG 103(a) DAFFER MCDANIEL LLP EXAMINER BAREFORD, KATHERINE A

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2187 Ex Parte LeCrone et al 10/955,142 HOMERE 103(a)/provisional obviousness double patenting MUIRHEAD AND SATURNELLI, LLC EXAMINER RUTZ, JARED IAN

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3749 Ex Parte Crawley et al 10/931,009 GREENHUT 103(a) PAMELA A. KACHUR EXAMINER PRICE, CARL D

REEXAMINATION

EXAMINER AFFIRMED IN PART and REVERSED IN PART with a new ground of rejection

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3621 Ex Parte 6,779,118 B1 et al 90/009,301 09/295,966 Ex parte LINKSMART WIRELESS TECHNOLOGY, LLC TORCZON 103(a) 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 103(a) For the appellant: Abraham Hershkovitz & Ed Garcia-Otero, HERSHKOVITZ & ASSOCIATES, LLC For the requestor: Jerry Turner Sewell For the Commissioner of Patents: Sam Rimell with Jeffrey D. Carlson and Alexander J. Kosowski EXAMINER RIMELL, SAMUEL G original EXAMINER ELISCA, PIERRE E


Callaway Golf Co. v. Acushnet Co., 576 F.3d 1331, 1343 (Fed. Cir. 2009) (holding jury verdict inconsistent for holding only the dependent claim to have been obvious); In re Muchmore, 433 F.2d 824, 824-25 (CCPA 1970) ("Since we agree with the board's conclusion of obviousness as to these narrow claims, the broader claims must likewise be obvious.").

AFFIRMED

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1786 Ex Parte Eagles 10/740,126 OWENS 102(b)/103(a) FROMMER LAWRENCE & HAUG EXAMINER CHOI, PETER Y

2400 Networking, Mulitplexing, Cable, and Security
2454 Ex Parte OKONSKI et al 10/285,036 CHEN 103(a) HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY EXAMINER DUONG, THOMAS

2455 Ex Parte Auffret et al 10/396,698 SMITH 103(a) King & Spalding LLP EXAMINER LAZARO, DAVID R

2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2823 Ex Parte Green 10/562,293 DANG 102(b)/103(a) PHILIPS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY & STANDARDS EXAMINER STARK, JARRETT J

2837 Ex Parte Fitzgibbon 10/118,523 SAADAT 102(b) FITCH EVEN TABIN & FLANNERY EXAMINER DUDA, RINA I

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3654 Ex Parte Morizon et al 10/561,557 HOELTER 103(a) Theodore W Olds Carlson Gaseky & Olds EXAMINER KRUER, STEFAN

Tuesday, August 23, 2011

mlot-fijalkowski, keller, specialty

REVERSED

1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1642 Ex Parte Fodstad et al 11/047,913 PRATS 103(a) STETINA BRUNDA GARRED & BRUCKER EXAMINER YU, MISOOK

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1762 Ex Parte Hung et al 10/408,141 FRANKLIN 112(2)/102(b)/103(a) HENKEL CORPORATION EXAMINER NILAND, PATRICK DENNIS

1789 Ex Parte Sandhu 10/903,295 GARRIS 103(a) Wells St. John P.S. EXAMINER GEORGE, PATRICIA ANN
2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2111 Ex Parte Rhee 11/244,482 POTHIER 103(a) MYERS BIGEL SIBLEY & SAJOVEC EXAMINER MISIURA, BRIAN THOMAS
2400 Networking, Mulitplexing, Cable, and Security
2444 Ex Parte Curran et al 10/154,009 POTHIER 102(b) 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 112(1) HESLIN ROTHENBERG FARLEY & MESITI P.C. EXAMINER SHAW, PELING ANDY

2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2838 Ex Parte Sutardja 10/810,452 RUGGIERO 103(a) HARNESS, DICKEY & PIERCE P.L.C. EXAMINER ROSARIO BENITEZ, GUSTAVO A
2893 Ex Parte Otsuka et al 10/350,219 MANTIS MERCADER 103(a) KRATZ, QUINTOS & HANSON, LLP EXAMINER NGUYEN, DILINH P
3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3643 Ex Parte Modglin 10/919,079 HORNER 102(b)/103(a) Hovey Williams LLP EXAMINER POON, PETER M
3656 Ex Parte Nagle et al 11/561,122 SPAHN 103(a) MICHAEL BEST & FRIEDRICH LLP EXAMINER LUONG, VINH
3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3742 Ex Parte Vinegar et al 10/693,816 O’NEILL 103(a) DEL CHRISTENSEN SHELL OIL COMPANY EXAMINER CAMPBELL, THOR S
3746 Ex Parte Krisher 11/094,581 SAINDON 102(b)/103(a) MARSHALL & MELHORN, LLC EXAMINER WEINSTEIN, LEONARD J

AFFIRMED-IN-PART

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2172 Ex Parte Parker et al 10/174,619 COURTENAY 103(a)/112(2) 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 112(2) SHOOK, HARDY & BACON L.L.P. (MICROSOFT CORPORATION) EXAMINER PILLAI, NAMITHA
AFFIRMED

1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1627 Ex Parte Gershon 10/883,406 GREEN obviousness-type double patenting/103(a) BUCKLEY, MASCHOFF & TALWALKAR LLC EXAMINER WANG, SHENGJUN
1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1771 Ex Parte Ayoub et al 11/446,853 KRATZ 103(a) SHELL OIL COMPANY EXAMINER SINGH, PREM C
2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2179 Ex Parte Phillips et al 10/656,015 DIXON 103(a) GATES & COOPER LLP EXAMINER AUGUSTINE, NICHOLAS
2400 Networking, Mulitplexing, Cable, and Security
2493 Ex Parte Lazaridis 12/751,263 ZECHER 112(2)/103(a) Leveque Intellectual Property Law, P.C. EXAMINER THIAW, CATHERINE B


Evidence of classification of prior art in different categories by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office “is inherently weak . . . because considerations in forming a classification system differ from those relating to a person of ordinary skill seeking solution for a particular problem.” In re Mlot-Fijalkowski, 676 F.2d 666, 670 n.5 (CCPA 1982).

Mlot-Fijalkowski, In re, 676 F.2d 666, 213 USPQ 713 (CCPA 1982) . . . . . . . . . 2141.01(a)

2600 Communications
2612 Ex Parte Tylicki et al 10/890,620 MANTIS MERCADER 103(a) FITCH EVEN TABIN & FLANNERY EXAMINER WALK, SAMUEL J

“[O]ne cannot show non-obviousness by attacking references individually where . . . the rejections are based on combinations of references.” In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 426 (CCPA 1981). “The test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference . . . . Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art.” Id. at 425.

Keller, In re, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 707.07(f), 2145
3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3733 Ex Parte Justis et al 11/341,239 O’NEILL 102(b)/103(a) Medtronic, Inc. (Spinal) EXAMINER HAMMOND, ELLEN CHRISTINA
3761 Ex Parte Rosenberg 10/656,973 McCARTHY 103(a) NUTTER MCCLENNEN & FISH LLP EXAMINER DEAK, LESLIE R
3768 Ex Parte Doorn et al 11/192,203 SCHEINER 103(a) LOS ALAMOS NATIONAL SECURITY, LLC LOS ALAMOS NATIONAL LABORATORY EXAMINER JUNG, UNSU

See Specialty Composites v. Cabot Corp., 845 F.2d 981, 991 (Fed. Cir. 1988) (“If the invention here would not have been obvious to one of extraordinary skill, it follows that in this case it would not be obvious to one with lesser skills.”).

Monday, August 22, 2011

amgen2, sasse

REVERSED

1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1623 Ex Parte Komiya 10/474,744 PRATS 103(a) RADER FISHMAN & GRAUER PLLC EXAMINER WHITE, EVERETT NMN

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1763 Ex Parte Seidling et al 11/847,772 McKELVEY 103(a) DORITY & MANNING, P.A. EXAMINER ASDJODI, MOHAMMAD REZA

1781 Ex Parte Soper et al 10/555,727 PRATS 102(b)/103(a) CURATOLO SIDOTI CO., LPA EXAMINER CHAWLA, JYOTI

2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2883 Ex Parte Lavranchuk 11/618,257 RUGGIERO 102(b) WALL & TONG, LLP/ALCATEL-LUCENT USA INC. EXAMINER HEALY, BRIAN

AFFIRMED-IN-PART

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2185 Ex Parte Shah et al 10/983,833 ZECHER 101/102(b)/103(a) Walter W. Duft EXAMINER THAI, TUAN V

2188 Ex Parte Kumar 11/237,865 DILLON Dissenting-in-part JEFFERY 103(a) HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY EXAMINER CHERY, MARDOCHEE

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3623 Ex Parte Troyer 09/952,002 FISCHETTI 103(a) PPG INDUSTRIES INC EXAMINER
STERRETT, JONATHAN G

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3731 Ex Parte Wilson et al 10/801,355 HOELTER 103(a) Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC LAWRENCE LIVERMORE NATIONAL LABORATORY EXAMINER SONNETT, KATHLEEN C

3743 Ex Parte Wakeman 10/285,012 BAHR 112(1)/103(a) Patrick S. Yoder Fletcher, Yoder & Van Someren EXAMINER LU, JIPING

3752 Ex Parte Chuprin 10/763,909 BARRETT 102(b)/103(a) 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 103(a) I. BROROVSKY EXAMINER HWU, DAVIS D

However, the disclosures of a prior art reference are presumed to be enabled. Amgen Inc. v. Hoechst Marion Roussel, Inc., 314 F.3d 1313, 1354 (Fed. Cir. 2003). Appellant bears the burden of showing non-enablement of Farley, but has not done so. Id. at 1355 (quoting In re Sasse, 629 F.2d 675, 681 (CCPA 1980)).

Sasse, In re, 629 F.2d 675, 207 USPQ 107 (CCPA 1980). . . . . . . . . . . . .716.07, 2121, 2121.02

REEXAMINATION

EXAMINER AFFIRMED

3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU)
1614 Ex Parte 6506400 et al 90/010,445 10/028,987 Ex parte BIMEDA RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT LIMITED LEBOVITZ 112(1) Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP Third Party Requester: Judy Jarecki-Black, Ph.D., JD Merial Limited EXAMINER HUANG, EVELYN MEI original EXAMINER REAMER, JAMES H

EXAMINER REVERSED

3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU)
3203 Ex Parte 6,918,532 et al 90/008,843 07/465,639 Ex parte KRAFT FOODS GLOBAL BRANDS LLC. Patent Owner, Appellant SONG 103(a) For Patent Owner: FITCH, EVEN, TABIN, & FLANNERY For Third Party Requester: Douglas J. Bucklin VOLPE and KOENIG, P.C. EXAMINER GELLNER, JEFFREY L original EXAMINER RACHUBA, MAURINA T

AFFIRMED

1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1611 Ex Parte Rekhi et al 11/262,672 GREEN 103(a) Fox Rothschild, LLP Elan Pharma International Limited EXAMINER LOVE, TREVOR M

1618 Ex Parte Langstrom et al 11/344,783 GREEN 103(a) Amersham Health, Inc EXAMINER PERREIRA, MELISSA JEAN

1651 Ex Parte Wong et al 09/912,494 SCHEINER 102(b)/102(e)/103(a) Solae, LLC EXAMINER WARE, DEBORAH K

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1777 Ex Parte Krokoszinski et al 11/277,657 HASTINGS 103(a) GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY EXAMINER MENON, KRISHNAN S

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2113 Ex Parte Dunstan 10/644,432 MORGAN 102(e)/103(a) Schwabe Williamson & Wyatt EXAMINER BONZO, BRYCE P

2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2829 Ex Parte Lee et al 11/162,027 WHITEHEAD, JR. 102(b)/103(a) LAW OFFICES OF MIKIO ISHIMARU EXAMINER TRAN, THANH Y

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3737 Ex Parte Candy et al 11/904,823 CALVE 103(a) Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC LAWRENCE LIVERMORE NATIONAL LABORATORY EXAMINER KISH, JAMES M

3764 Ex Parte Price 10/741,755 BAHR 102(b) 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 102(b) KIMBERLY-CLARK WORLDWIDE, INC. Tara Pohlkotte EXAMINER ANDERSON, CATHARINE L

REHEARING

DENIED

2600 Communications
2616 Ex Parte 7035281 et al 95/001,089 09/660,709 BELKIN INTERNATIONAL, INC.; CISCO LINKSYS LLC; D-LINK SYSTEMS, INC.; AND NETGEAR, INC. Requester and Appellant v. OPTIMUMPATH, LLC. Patent Owner and Respondent SIU SNQ PATENT OWNER: Tony D. Alexander TECHNOLOGY LEGAL COUNSEL LLC THIRD PARTY REQUESTER HAYNES AND BOONE, LLP EXAMINER HUGHES, DEANDRA M original EXAMINER NGUYEN, TOAN D

Friday, August 19, 2011

fritch, princeton biochemicals, gechter, pullman-standard

REVERSED

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1789 Ex Parte Hsu 12/156,687 NAGUMO 103(a) PRICE HENEVELD LLP EXAMINER TRAN LIEN, THUY
2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2114 Ex Parte Shepard 11/541,354 DESHPANDE 102(e) 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 101 BINGHAM MCCUTCHEN LLP EXAMINER LE, DIEU MINH T

2165 Ex Parte Armanino et al 11/130,773 STEPHENS 101/103(a) AT & T Legal Department - BK EXAMINER PULLIAM, CHRISTYANN R
2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2823 Ex Parte Neo et al 11/164,204 SAADAT 103(a) NORTH AMERICA INTELL
ECTUAL PROPERTY CORPORATION EXAMINER MALDONADO, JULIO J
3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3761 Ex Parte Suzuki et al 11/302,162 COCKS 112(2)/103(a) LOWE HAUPTMAN HAM & BERNER, LLP EXAMINER ZALUKAEVA, TATYANA

A patent examiner evaluating the patentability of a claimed invention must take care when assessing the teachings of the prior art to refrain from impermissible reliance on hindsight using the inventor’s own disclosure in concluding obviousness. In re Fritch, 972 F.2d 1260, 1266 (Fed. Cir. 1992). The record must show that a skilled artisan confronted by the problems faced by the inventor and with no knowledge of the claimed invention would have selected the various elements of the prior art and combined them in the manner claimed. Princeton Biochemicals, Inc. v. Beckman Coulter, Inc., 411 F.3d 1332, 1337 (Fed. Cir. 2005).

AFFIRMED-IN-PART

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1712 Ex Parte Mellott et al 11/514,320 GARRIS 103(a) 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 103(a) NIXON & VANDERHYE, PC EXAMINER VETERE, ROBERT A
3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3711 Ex Parte Nelson 11/337,098 BAHR 103(a) Jonathan A. Bay EXAMINER ARYANPOUR, MITRA


REEXAMINATION

EXAMINER AFFIRMED-IN-PART

3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU)

3671 Ex Parte 6,336,311 et al 95/000,245 THE TORO COMPANY Requester v. TEXTRON INNOVATIONS, INC. Patent Owner, Appellant SONG 102/103(a)/112(1) Patent Owner: Harness, Dickey & Pierce, P.L.C. Third Party Requestor James W. Miller EXAMINER JASTRZAB, JEFFREY R original EXAMINER PEZZUTO, ROBERT ERIC

AFFIRMED

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2117 Ex Parte Aitken et al 11/270,818 HUGHES 102(b)/103(a) NIXON & VANDERHYE, PC EXAMINER TABONE JR, JOHN J

2186 Ex Parte Arndt et al 11/066,487 STEPHENS 102(b)/103(a) IBM CORP (YA) EXAMINER ALSIP, MICHAEL
2400 Networking, Mulitplexing, Cable, and Security
2492 Ex Parte Novack et al 10/887,807 GONSALVES 101/103(a) AT & T LEGAL DEPARTMENT - GB EXAMINER SHAN, APRIL YING
2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2854 Ex Parte Gotsick et al 11/592,680 KRIVAK 103(a) John L. Cordani Carmody & Torrance, LLP EXAMINER YAN, REN LUO

2858 Ex Parte Lubcke et al 10/694,349 HOFF 102(b)/103(a) BACON & THOMAS, PLLC EXAMINER KOVAL, MELISSA J

REHEARING

DENIED - VACATED

2400 Networking, Mulitplexing, Cable, and Security
2457 Ex Parte Aikens et al 10/370,640 HUGHES Concurring BLANKENSHIP 101/102/103 Cuenot, Forsythe & Kim, LLC EXAMINER BURGESS, BARBARA N

As explained by the Gechter court (supra), vacatur is appropriate when the decision under review “lacks adequate fact findings [and] meaningful review is not possible.” Gechter, 116 F.3d at 1457. The federal circuit courts of appeal vacate trial court decisions “[w]hen an appellate court discerns that a district court has failed to make a finding because of an erroneous view of the law.” Pullman-Standard v. Swint, 456 U.S. 273, 291 (1982). See 9 Moore’s Federal Practice § 52.12[1] (3d ed., Matthew Bender & Co., Inc. 1997) (“When the trial court completely fails . . . to make findings on a material issue, the appellate court is entitled to vacate the judgment and remand the action to the district court . . . .” (footnotes omitted)).