SEARCH

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

Wednesday, November 7, 2012

katz

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1777 Ex Parte Zha et al 10537760 - (D) NAGUMO 103 SIEMENS CORPORATION MENON, KRISHNAN S

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3686 Ex Parte Gottesman et al 11115626 - (D) MEDLOCK 103 Medtronic, Inc. (CRDM) NGUYEN, HIEP VAN

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3778 Ex Parte Harkness 11445364 - (D) GRIMES 103 KIMBERLY-CLARK WORLDWIDE, INC. HAND, MELANIE JO

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2114 Ex Parte Sutardja et al 11196651 - (D) POTHIER 103 HARNESS, DICKEY & PIERCE P.L.C. TRUONG, LOAN

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2443 Ex Parte Rhodes 11021942 - (D) ZECHER 103 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY DENNISON, JERRY B

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3682 Ex Parte Shahoumian et al 10157661 - (D) PETRAVICK 112(2) 102/103 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY BOVEJA, NAMRATA  

Also, where relatively low level functions are claimed, the disclosure of a general purpose computer may be sufficient.

Katz has not claimed a specific function performed by a special purpose computer, but has simply recited the claimed functions of "processing," "receiving," and "storing." Absent a possible narrower construction of the terms "processing," "receiving," and "storing," [] those functions can be achieved by any general purpose computer without special programming. As such, it was not necessary to disclose more structure than the general purpose processor that performs those functions. Those seven claims do not run afoul of the rule against purely functional claiming, because the functions of "processing," "receiving," and "storing" are coextensive with the structure disclosed, i.e., a general purpose processor.

Katz v Am. Airlines, 639 F.3d 1303, 1316 (Fed,Cir. 2011)  

REHEARING  

GRANTED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1633 Ex Parte Dzau et al 10850994 - (D) ADAMS obviousness-type double patenting J. MICHAEL SCHIFF WOITACH, JOSEPH T

No comments :