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

Search This Blog

Loading...

Tuesday, July 24, 2012

dembiczak, gartside, mouttet, etter

custom search

REVERSED
1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1637 Ex Parte Zheng et al 10667191 - (D) LEBOVITZ 102/103 SIEMENS CORPORATION CHUNDURU, SURYAPRABHA

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2174 Ex Parte Blair et al 11170676 - (D) FRAHM Dissenting KOHUT 103 SHERIDAN ROSS P.C. PHAM, LINH K

2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2453 Ex Parte Emerson et al 11594633 - (D) MacDONALD 102/103/obviousness-type double patenting HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY NGUYEN, THU HA T

2463 Ex Parte Bois et al 10366932 - (D) EVANS 103 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY MARCELO, MELVIN C

2478 Ex Parte Jai et al 10600995 - (D) GONSALVES 102/103 Ryan, Mason & Lewis, LLP BRUCKART, BENJAMIN R

2600 Communications
2617 Ex Parte van Rooyen et al 11010983 - (D) HAHN 103 STERNE, KESSLER, GOLDSTEIN & FOX P.L.L.C. AFSHAR, KAMRAN

2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2828 Ex Parte Ito et al 11038123 - (D) COURTENAY 103 Morrison & Foerster LLP GOLUB-MILLER, MARCIA A

The presence or absence of a reason "to combine references in an obviousness determination is a pure question of fact." In re Gartside, 203 F.3d 1305, 1316 (Fed. Cir. 2000) (citing In re Dembiczak, 175 F.3d 994, 1000 (Fed. Cir. 1999)).

Gartside, In re, 203 F.3d 1305, 53 USPQ2d 1769 (Fed. Cir. 2000) . .1216.01, 2144.03

Although the teaching, suggestion, or motivation (TSM) test is no longer a rigid rule post KSR, "the best defense against the subtle but powerful attraction of a hindsight-based obviousness analysis is rigorous application of the requirement for a showing of the teaching or motivation to combine prior art references." Dembiczak, 175 F.3d at 999.

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

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3653 Ex Parte Zeller 11854230 - (D) STAICOVICI 103 Zeman-Mullen & Ford, LLP RODRIGUEZ, JOSEPH C

3682 Ex Parte Choi et al 10508616 - (D) TURNER 103 LOWE HAUPTMAN HAM & BERNER, LLP HOAR, COLLEEN A

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3724 Ex Parte Patton et al 09957011 - (D) HORNER 102
EASTMAN KODAK COMPANY FRIDIE JR, WILLMON
3735 Ex Parte Widenhouse et al 11798497 - (D) WALSH 103 WELSH FLAXMAN & GITLER LLC DORNA, CARRIE R

3738 Ex Parte Biss et al 11025223 - (D) MILLS 103 MAGINOT, MOORE & BECK, LLP WILLSE, DAVID H

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3676 Ex Parte Marya et al 11769230 - (D) SPAHN 102/103 102/103 SCHLUMBERGER RESERVOIR COMPLETIONS BOMAR, THOMAS S

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3721 Ex Parte Surti 11448494 - (D) BAHR 102/103 102/103 BRINKS HOFER GILSON & LIONE/CHICAGO/COOK CHUKWURAH, NATHANIEL C

3731 Ex Parte Wasicek 10616785 - (D) WALSH 103 103 SEAGER, TUFTE & WICKHEM, LLC NGUYEN, VI X

3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU)
2819 CME GROUP, INC., Requester, Appellant v. REALTIME DATA LLC. Patent Owner, Respondent 95001517 - (D) 7,714,747 11/651,365 SIU 102/103 37 C.F.R. § 41.77(b) 102/103 STERNE, KESSLER, GOLDSTEIN & FOX P.L.L.C. HUGHES, DEANDRA M original NGUYEN, LINH V

AFFIRMED
1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1611 Ex Parte Spisinski et al 11011268 - (D) PER CURIAM 112(2)/103 PITNEY BOWES INC. PURDY, KYLE A

1644 Ex Parte Allen 11436652 - (D) PRATS 112(1)/103 SMITH MOORE LEATHERWOOD LLP DAHLE, CHUN WU

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2113 Ex Parte Flocken et al 11184253 - (D) RUGGIERO 102 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY MCCARTHY, CHRISTOPHER S

2166 Ex Parte Li et al 10643628 - (D) THOMAS 103 HICKMAN PALERMO TRUONG BECKER BINGHAM WONG/ORACLE SAEED, USMAAN

2173 Ex Parte Dolimier et al 10264031 - (D) ARBES 103 PHILIPS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY & STANDARDS BASOM, BLAINE T

2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2426 Ex Parte Gaul et al 09924111 - (D) DILLON 102/103 MERCHANT & GOULD SCIENTIFIC ATLANTA, A CISCO COMPANY HSIUNGFEI, PENG

2600 Communications
2617 Ex Parte Howell et al 09968746 - (D) JEFFERY 103 COCHRAN FREUND & YOUNG LLC EDOUARD, PATRICK NESTOR

We see no error in this position, for “[i]t is well-established that a determination of obviousness based on teachings from multiple references does not require an actual, physical substitution of elements.” In re Mouttet, --- F.3d ---, 2012 WL 2384056, at *5 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (citing In re Etter, 756 F.2d 852, 859 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (en banc) (noting that the criterion for obviousness is not whether the references can be physically combined, but whether the claimed invention is rendered obvious by the teachings of the prior art as a whole)).

Etter, In re, 756 F.2d 852, 225 USPQ 1 (Fed. Cir. 1985) . . . . . . . . . 2242, 2258, 2279, 2286, 2642, 2686.04

2617 Ex Parte Carrion-Rodrigo 10875584 - (D) BISK 103 MINTZ, LEVIN, COHN, FERRIS, GLOVSKY AND POPEO, P.C BRANDT, CHRISTOPHER M

2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2836 Ex Parte Belson et al 11193266 - (D) HAHN 103 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY KAPLAN, HAL IRA

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3662 Ex Parte Adam et al 10335045 - (D) TURNER 102/103 APPLE INC./BSTZ BLAKELY SOKOLOFF TAYLOR & ZAFMAN LLP BADII, BEHRANG

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3727 Ex Parte Boone 11047407 - (D) BAHR 103 ZARLEY LAW FIRM P.L.C. SHAKERI, HADI

3732 Ex Parte Ha et al 10787804 - (D) SCHEINER 102/103 THE PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY LEWIS, RALPH A

3737 Ex Parte Hogan et al 11588043 - (D) FREDMAN 112(1) 103 GE HEALTHCARE c/o FLETCHER YODER, PC  SANTOS, JOSEPH M

3738 Ex Parte Lenz 11289085 - (D) ASTORINO 112(1)/112(2) 102/103 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 102 VIDAS, ARRETT & STEINKRAUS, P.A. GHERBI, SUZETTE JAIME J

3762 Ex Parte Kollatschny 11338375 - (D) MILLS 103 CYBERONICS, INC. LAVERT, NICOLE F

3778 Ex Parte Edgett et al 12122880 - (D) ADAMS 103 MICHAUD-Kinney Group LLP CRAIG, PAULA L
 
3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU)
1636 Ex parte The Trustees of Columbia University 90/006,953 6,455,275 10870229 - (D) LEBOVITZ obviousness-type double patenting COOPER & DUNHAM, LLP QIAN, CELINE X

REHEARING

DENIED
2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2168 Ex Parte Sanders et al 10776069 - (R) DANG 103 Sue Z. Shaper MORRISON, JAY A

2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2832 Ex Parte Van Os et al 11692650 - (R) HOMERE 102 Murphy, Bilak & Homiller, PLLC WARREN, DAVID S

No comments :