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

Search This Blog

Loading...

Saturday, March 3, 2012

steele, wilson

REVERSED

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2165 Ex Parte Burdick et al 11/007,247 POTHIER 102(e)/103(a) 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 112(1) SHOOK, HARDY & BACON L.L.P. (MICROSOFT CORPORATION) EXAMINER
HICKS, MICHAEL J

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3626 Ex Parte Brimdyr 10/924,504 CRAWFORD 112(2)/103(a) OCCHIUTI ROHLICEK & TSAO, LLP EXAMINER BURGESS, JOSEPH D

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3736 Ex Parte Wilkowske et al 11/033,098 GRIMES 103(a) SJM/AFD-WILEY EXAMINER SMITH, FANGEMONIQUE A

3767 Ex Parte Albert et al 11/161,549 SAINDON 103(a) WOOD, HERRON & EVANS, LLP EXAMINER BOSWORTH, KAMI A

3767 Ex Parte Lilley et al 11/161,543 SAINDON 102(e)/103(a) WOOD, HERRON & EVANS, LLP EXAMINER SCHMIDT, EMILY LOUISE


AFFIRMED-IN-PART

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1735 Ex Parte Goettsch 12/134,270 HOUSEL 103(a) 102(b)/103(a) FRASER CLEMENS MARTIN & MILLER LLC EXAMINER KERNS, KEVIN P


3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3689 Ex Parte Adelman et al 11/946,701 KIM 112(2)/101/103(a)/102(b)/103(a) 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 112(2) Go Daddy Operating Company, LLC EXAMINER FISHER, PAUL R

Before a proper review of the rejections under 35 U.S.C. §§ 101 and 103(a) can be performed, the subject matter encompassed by the claims on appeal must be reasonably understood without resort to speculation. Since the claims fail to satisfy the requirements under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, we are constrained to reverse, pro forma, the Examiner’s rejections under 35 U.S.C. §§ 101 and 103(a). See In re Steele, 305 F.2d 859, 862 (CCPA 1962) (A prior art rejection cannot be sustained if the hypothetical person of ordinary skill in the art would have to make speculative assumptions concerning the meaning of claim language.); see also In re Wilson, 424 F.2d 1382, 1385 (CCPA 1970) (“If no reasonably definite meaning can be ascribed to certain terms in the claim, the subject matter does not become obvious-the claim becomes indefinite.”)

Steele, In re, 305 F.2d 859, 134 USPQ 292 (CCPA 1959) . . . . . . . . . . . . .2143.03, 2173.06

Wilson, In re, 424 F.2d 1382, 165 USPQ 494, (CCPA 1970).. . . . . . . . . . . .2143.03, 2173.06

AFFIRMED

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3687 Ex Parte Thomason et al 10/507,772 LORIN 103(a) PHILIPS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY & STANDARDS EXAMINER HAYLES, ASHFORD S

No comments :