SEARCH

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

Wednesday, August 8, 2012

pfizer, rinehart, zickendraht

custom search

REVERSED
1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1762 Ex Parte Xia et al 11382101 - (D) BEST 103 Loctite Corporation SASTRI, SATYA B

A combination of references only renders a claimed invention obvious if the skilled artisan would have had a reasonable expectation that the combination would work for its intended purpose. Pfizer, Inc. v. Apotex, Inc., 480 F.3d 1348, 1364 (Fed. Cir. 2007); In re Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 1053-54 (CCPA 1976).

Pfizer, Inc. v. Apotex Inc., 480 F.3d 1348, 82 USPQd 1321 (Fed. Cir. 2007) . . . 2143.01, 2145

Rinehart, In re, 531 F.2d 1048, 189 USPQ 143 (CCPA 1976) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2107.02, 2142, 2143.02, 2144.04

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2162 Ex Parte Wilson et al 10650904 - (D) POTHIER 103 IBM CORP C/O WINSTEAD P.C. GOFMAN, ALEX N

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3762 Ex Parte Singhal et al 10691917 - (D) WALSH 112(1) SHUMAKER & SIEFFERT, P. A. STOKLOSA, JOSEPH A

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3763 Ex Parte Berezowski et al 09823705 - (D) DANG 102/103 102 Tyco Healthcare Group LP d/b/a Covidien KOHARSKI, CHRISTOPHER

AFFIRMED
2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2197 Ex Parte Cromer et al 11394277 - (D) ZECHER 103 ROGITZ & ASSOCIATES PAN, HANG

2600 Communications
2624 Ex Parte Voronka et al 10958457 - (D) COURTENAY 112(2)/103/obviousness-type double patenting GIFFORD, KRASS, SPRINKLE,ANDERSON & CITKOWSKI, P.C FITZPATRICK, ATIBA O

The doctrine of double patenting seeks to prevent the unjustified extension of patent exclusivity beyond the term of a patent. The public policy behind this doctrine is that:

The public should . . . be able to act on the assumption that upon the expiration of the patent it will be free to use not only the invention claimed in the patent but also any modifications or variants thereof which would have been obvious to those of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made, taking into account the skill [in] the art and prior art other than the invention claimed in the issued patent.

In re Zickendraht, 319 F.2d 225, 232 (CCPA 1963) (Rich, J., concurring).

Zickendraht, In re, 319 F.2d 225, 138 USPQ 22 (CCPA 1963) . .804, 804.03, 1504.06

2625 Ex Parte Aschenbrenner et al 10881522 - (D) CHEN 103 Yudell Isidore Ng Russell PLLC TRAN, DOUGLAS Q

2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2833 Ex Parte Yoshida et al 11516787 - (D) GONSALVES 103 KANESAKA BERNER AND PARTNERS LLP FISHMAN, MARINA

2839 HENRY MILAN, Patent Owner and Appellant v. APPLE, INC., Third Party Requester and Respondent 95001083 6991483 10/987,242 MARTIN 112(1)/102/103 BUTZEL LONG REICHLE, KARIN M original ZARROLI, MICHAEL C

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3628 Ex Parte Albert et al 10645139 - (D) PETRAVICK 102/103 BAKER BOTTS L.L.P. ALLEN, AKIBA KANELLE

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3736 Ex Parte Miller 11147390 - (D) SCHEINER 103 WELSH FLAXMAN & GITLER LLC PANI, JOHN

3763 Ex Parte Wenchell 12503419 - (D) WALSH 103 Tyco Healthcare Group LP d/b/a Covidien KOHARSKI, CHRISTOPHER
 
REHEARING 

DENIED
1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1778 Ex Parte Halaka 11555975 - (D) FRANKLIN 112(1)/102/103 Talivaldis Cepuritis Olson & Cepuritis, Ltd. KURTZ, BENJAMIN M

No comments :