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

Search This Blog

Loading...

Tuesday, January 31, 2012

mostafazadeh, meyers

REVERSED

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1715 Ex Parte Davidson et al 11/243,302 HANLON 103(a) Eddie E. Scott EXAMINER TALBOT, BRIAN K

1727 Ex Parte Kanasugi 11/396,620 COLAIANNI 103(a) Squire Sanders (US) LLP EXAMINER ARCIERO, ADAM A

1735 Ex Parte Abell et al 12/278,901 DELMENDO 102(b)/103(a)/112(2) Muncy, Geissler, Olds & Lowe, PLLC EXAMINER SAAD, ERIN BARRY

1783 Ex Parte Mead et al 10/357,162 TIMM 102(b)/103(a) PIETRAGALLO GORDON ALFANO BOSICK & RASPANTI, LLP EXAMINER SIMONE, CATHERINE A

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2174 Ex Parte Arvin 10/657,427 FRAHM 103(a) GATES & COOPER LLP - Autodesk EXAMINER KE, PENG

2600 Communications
2627 Ex Parte An 10/847,469 HOFF 103(a) STAAS & HALSEY LLP EXAMINER FEILD, JOSEPH H

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3612 Ex Parte Searfoss 10/664,806 ASTORINO 102(e)/103(a) MILLER, CANFIELD, PADDOCK AND STONE EXAMINER GUTMAN, HILARY L

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3711 Ex Parte Guenther et al 10/625,325 ASTORINO 103(a)/nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting Wilson Sporting Goods Co. EXAMINER WONG, STEVEN B

3734 Ex Parte Ortiz et al 11/197,544 WALSH 103(a) WELSH FLAXMAN & GITLER LLC EXAMINER BACHMAN, LINDSEY MICHELE

3748 Ex Parte Yezerets et al 11/613,760 STAICOVICI 102(e) 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 103(a) CUMMINS, INC. EXAMINER TRAN, BINH Q

3763 Ex Parte Southam et al 11/456,952 HORNER 102(b)/103(a)/112(1) Incline / Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati EXAMINER VU, QUYNH-NHU HOANG

AFFIRMED-IN-PART

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2121 Ex Parte Popp 12/313,804 KRIVAK Dissenting-In-Part BAUMEISTER 103(a) 103(a) SMP Logic Systems EXAMINER GARLAND, STEVEN R

2184 Ex Parte Bohrer et al 10/948,407 WINSOR 103(a) 103(a) IBM CORPORATION (MH) c/o MITCH HARRIS, ATTORNEY AT LAW, L.L.C. EXAMINER MAMO, ELIAS

2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2833 Ex Parte Regnier et al 10/461,296 HAHN 103(a) 103(a) MOLEX INCORPORATED EXAMINER HARVEY, JAMES R

2878 Ex Parte Broude et al 12/589,296 KRIVAK 103(a) 103(a) LEON D. ROSEN FREILICH, HORNBAKER & ROSEN EXAMINER LEE, JOHN R

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3679 Ex Parte Mann 10/861,436 KAUFFMAN 102(b)/103(a)/112(2) 112(2) RENNER OTTO BOISSELLE & SKLAR, LLP EXAMINER KENNEDY, JOSHUA T


AFFIRMED

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1713 Ex Parte Dysard et al 11/448,205 SMITH 103(a) STEVEN WESEMAN CABOT MICROELECTRONICS CORPORATION EXAMINER DAHIMENE, MAHMOUD

1736 Ex Parte Dai et al 11/588,873 SMITH 103(a) CRAWFORD MAUNU PLLC EXAMINER MCCRACKEN, DANIEL

1746 Ex Parte Bogard et al 11/041,323 NAGUMO 103(a) Polster, Lieder, Woodruff & Lucchesi, L.C. EXAMINER GOFF II, JOHN L

1765 Ex Parte Bauer et al 10/524,039 HASTINGS 103(a) OBLON, SPIVAK, MCCLELLAND MAIER & NEUSTADT, L.L.P. EXAMINER COONEY, JOHN M

1767 Ex Parte Wang 11/132,604 SMITH 102(b)/103(a) Steptoe & Johnson LLP EXAMINER HEINCER, LIAM J

1767 Ex Parte Zahora et al 11/667,725 SMITH 103(a) Nixon & Vanderhye PC / DSM Desotech Inc. EXAMINER MCCULLEY, MEGAN CASSANDRA

1782 Ex Parte Hansborough 11/370,529 HASTINGS 103(a)/112(1) ROETZEL & ANDRESS EXAMINER WOOD, ELLEN S

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2173 Ex Parte Fernandez et al 10/437,230 WINSOR 103(a)/112(1) SHOOK, HARDY & BACON L.L.P. (MICROSOFT CORPORATION) EXAMINER VU, KIEU D

2174 Ex Parte Vienneau et al 11/039,524 ROBERTSON 103(a) GATES & COOPER LLP - Autodesk EXAMINER JOHNSON, GRANT D

2183 Ex Parte Chauvel et al 10/631,939 THOMAS 103(a) TEXAS INSTRUMENTS INCORPORATED EXAMINER PETRANEK, JACOB ANDREW

2193 Ex Parte Baker et al 10/099,508 JEFFERY 103(a) HESLIN ROTHENBERG FARLEY & MESITI P.C. EXAMINER MITCHELL, JASON D

2600 Communications
2618 Ex Parte Rick et al 10/120,329 JEFFERY 103(a) QUALCOMM INCORPORATED EXAMINER HUANG, WEN WU

2629 Ex Parte Stewart 11/146,773 DANG 103(a)/112(1) IBM CORPORATION (RVW) EXAMINER SIM, YONG H

2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2814 Ex Parte Ha et al 11/536,502 ROBERTSON 102(b)/103(a) LAW OFFICES OF MIKIO ISHIMARU EXAMINER PIZARRO CRESPO, MARCOS D

2829 Ex Parte Forbes et al 11/091,285 HAHN 103(a) ROUND LERNER, DAVID, LITTENBERG, KRUMHOLZ & MENTLIK, LLP EXAMINER MAI, ANH D

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3617 Ex Parte Krueger 12/356,660 7,360,846 McCARTHY 251/103(a) HISCOCK & BARCLAY, LLP EXAMINER BELLINGER, JASON R

Nevertheless,

the recapture rule is violated when a limitation added during prosecution is eliminated entirely, even if other narrowing limitations are added to the [reissue] claim. If the added limitation is modified but not eliminated, the claims must be materially narrowed relative to the surrendered subject matter such that the surrendered subject matter is not entirely or substantially recaptured.

In re Mostafazadeh, 643 F.3d 1353, 1361 (Fed. Cir. 2011).

In Mostafazadeh, our reviewing court acknowledged that the recapture rule may not be triggered if the subject matter of the reissue claim is “wholly unrelated” to the subject matter surrendered during prosecution. Id., 643 F.3d at 1360. The court suggested that such a situation might arise if the reissue claim recites additional inventions, embodiments or species not originally claimed, that is, overlooked aspects of the invention as disclosed. Id. (construing MANUAL OF PATENT EXAMINING PROCEDURE (“MPEP”) 5 § 1412.02(I)(C)).

See, e.g., B.E. Meyers & Co. v. United States, 56 USPQ2d 1110, 1116 (Ct. Fed. Cls. 2000)(example of a case, cited in § 1412.02 of the MPEP, illustrating when the subject matter of the reissue claim might be “wholly unrelated” to the subject matter surrendered during prosecution).


3636 Ex Parte Dwire et al 11/088,457 BAHR 102(b)/103(a) Chrysler Group LLC EXAMINER DUNN, DAVID R

3636 Ex Parte Hoffman et al 11/291,662 ASTORINO 103(a)/112(2) MYERS BIGEL SIBLEY & SAJOVEC EXAMINER NELSON JR, MILTON

3657 Ex Parte Bates 10/381,031 PER CURIAM 103(a) NIXON PEABODY, LLP EXAMINER KING, BRADLEY T

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3748 Ex Parte Sun 11/833,342 ASTORINO 103(a)/112(1)/112(2) CARLSON, GASKEY & OLDS, P.C. EXAMINER TRIEU, THERESA

3752 Ex Parte Thompson 11/425,494 ASTORINO 103(a) Jerome R. Drouillard EXAMINER GORMAN, DARREN W

3779 Ex Parte Horne et al 10/766,295 CLARKE 103(a) ST. ONGE STEWARD JOHNSTON & REENS, LLC EXAMINER KASZTEJNA, MATTHEW JOHN

Monday, January 30, 2012

K-2, renishaw

REVERSED

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1745 Ex Parte Bieser et al 10,838,426 COLAIANNI 103(a) Ballard Spahr LLP EXAMINER TOLIN, MICHAEL A

2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2825 Ex Parte Miller et al 10/225,638 MANTIS MERCADER 102(e) Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. c/o Williams, Morgan & Amerson, P.C. EXAMINER WHITMORE, STACY

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3743 Ex Parte Miles et al 11/153,681 KAUFFMAN 103(a) Smiths IP EXAMINER BASICHAS, ALFRED

An artisan would interpret that removably secured or attached legs are those that they may be removed in the ordinary sense of the word, such as by unscrewing a screw. See K-2 Corp. v. Salomon S.A., 191 F.3d 1356, 1365 (Fed. Cir. 1999) (interpreting that rivets and laminate permanently affix while, in contrast, screws are removable).

3764 Ex Parte Kassel et al 11/293,479 GREENHUT 102(b)/103(a) 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 112(4) HOWARD M COHN EXAMINER GANESAN, SUNDHARA M

AFFIRMED-IN-PART

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2116 Ex Parte O'Shea 10/335,020 KOHUT 102(e) 102(e)/103(a) BLAKELY SOKOLOFF TAYLOR & ZAFMAN LLP EXAMINER RAHMAN, FAHMIDA

2600 Communications
2627 Ex Parte Biskeborn et al 10/769,271 HAHN 102 102/103(a) ZILKA-KOTAB, PC- IBM EXAMINER RENNER, CRAIG A
see also Renishaw PLC v. Marposs Societa’ per Azioni, 158 F.3d 1243, 1250 (Fed. Cir. 1998) (“[W]here there are several common meanings for a claim term, the patent disclosure serves to point away from the improper meanings and toward the proper meaning.”).

Renishaw PLC v. Marposs Societa’ per Azioni, 158 F.3d 1243, 48 USPQ2d 1117 (Fed. Cir. 1998). . . . . . . .
804


3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3632 Ex Parte Funderburg 11/652,699 LEE 102(b)/103(a)/112(2) 102(b)/103(a) 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 103(a) Mr. Timothy D. Smith EXAMINER DUCKWORTH, BRADLEY

3677 Ex Parte Attride et al 11/239,588 GREENHUT 103(a) 102(b)/103(a) COATS & BENNETT/SONY ERICSSON EXAMINER O BRIEN, JEFFREY D

AFFIRMED

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1763 Ex Parte Nodelman et al 11/300,837 MILLS 103(a) BAYER MATERIAL SCIENCE LLC EXAMINER LEONARD, MICHAEL L

2400 Networking, Mulitplexing, Cable, and Security
2421 Ex Parte Kuether et al 10/813,948 RUGGIERO 103(a) THE DIRECTV GROUP, INC. EXAMINER PARRY, CHRISTOPHER L

2600 Communications
2612 Ex Parte Pirschel 10/549,020 BAUMEISTER 103(a) TUCKER ELLIS & WEST LLP EXAMINER NWUGO, OJIAKO K

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3637 Ex Parte Mensen 12/940,774 5,657,600 GREENHUT 103(a)/251 KILPATRICK TOWNSEND & STOCKTON LLP EXAMINER TRAN, HANH VAN

Friday, January 20, 2012

modine

REVERSED

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1726 Ex Parte Kish 11/654,431 ROBERTSON 103(a)/112(2) CHRISTOPHER JOHN RUDY EXAMINER GRESO, AARON J

“Such broadening usages as ‘about’ must be given reasonable scope; they must be viewed by the decisionmaker as they would be understood by persons experienced in the field of the invention. Although it is rarely feasible to attach a precise limit to ‘about,’ the usage can usually be understood in light of the technology embodied in the invention.” Modine Mfg. Co. v. U.S. ITC, 75 F.3d 1545, 1554 (Fed. Cir. 1996) (internal citations omitted).

1777 Ex Parte Sirkar et al 11/189,213 NAGUMO 103(a) MCCARTER & ENGLISH, LLP STAMFORD EXAMINER MENON, KRISHNAN S

2400 Networking, Mulitplexing, Cable, and Security
2421 Ex Parte Kaminsky et al 10/321,356 DROESCH 102(a) CAREY, RODRIGUEZ, GREENBERG & O'KEEFE, LLP STEVEN M. GREENBERG EXAMINER NGUYEN BA, HOANG VU A

2494 Ex Parte Kruse 10/571,955 STEPHENS 101/102(b)/103(a) 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 103(a) Fleit Gibbons Gutman Bongini & Bianco PL EXAMINER ABRISHAMKAR, KAVEH

2600 Communications
2612 Ex Parte Lowe 10/847,542 NAPPI 103(a) Sheridan Ross P.C EXAMINER BROWN, VERNAL U

2614 Ex Parte Bruelle-Drews 10/528,870 HAHN 102(e) HARMAN - BRINKS HOFER INDY Brinks Hofer Gilson & Lione EXAMINER LAO, LUN S


AFFIRMED-IN-PART

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2157 Ex Parte Nevill-Manning 10/608,270 JEFFERY 103(a) 103(a) HARRITY & HARRITY, LLP EXAMINER CHANNAVAJJALA, SRIRAMA T

AFFIRMED

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1721 Ex Parte Suzuki et al 12/104,068 GARRIS obviousness-type double patenting/103(a) OBLON, SPIVAK, MCCLELLAND MAIER & NEUSTADT, L.L.P. EXAMINER DOTE, JANIS L

1722 Ex Parte Shirasagi et al 10/579,211 PAK GAUDETTE HASTINGS PER CURIAM 103(a) RADER FISHMAN & GRAUER PLLC EXAMINER VERDERAME, ANNA L

1723 Ex Parte Maruyama 10/790,759 OWENS 103(a)/112(1) McDERMOTT, WILL & EMERY EXAMINER MOWLA, GOLAM

1734 Ex Parte Takada et al 10/509,156 SMITH 103(a) WESTERMAN, HATTORI, DANIELS & ADRIAN, LLP EXAMINER ZHU, WEIPING

1745 Ex Parte Sias et al 11/015,845 SMITH 102(a)/102(b)/103(a) BRINKS HOFER GILSON & LIONE EXAMINER KOCH, GEORGE R

1762 Ex Parte Miller et al 11/129,121 HASTINGS 103(a)/112(1) BARLOW, JOSEPHS & HOLMES, LTD. EXAMINER NERANGIS, VICKEY MARIE

1781 Ex Parte Ootsuka et al 10/472,033 OWENS 103(a) OBLON, SPIVAK, MCCLELLAND MAIER & NEUSTADT, L.L.P. EXAMINER STULII, VERA

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2161 Ex Parte Dettinger et al 10/992,398 ROBERTSON 103(a) IBM CORPORATION EXAMINER NGUYEN, THU N

2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2828 Ex Parte Barth et al 11/932,170 WINSOR 103(a) PATTERSON THUENTE CHRISTENSEN PEDERSEN, P.A. EXAMINER STULTZ, JESSICA T

2834 Ex Parte Zafferri 11/558,274 BAUMEISTER 103(a) SNR DENTON US LLP EXAMINER DESAI, NAISHADH N

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3694 Ex Parte Naas et al 10/828,497 KIM 103(a) Reed Smith LLP EXAMINER MERCHANT, SHAHID R

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3753 Ex Parte Yamamoto et al 11/352,357 COCKS 103(a) NIXON & VANDERHYE, PC EXAMINER BASTIANELLI, JOHN

REHEARING

DENIED

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2166 Ex Parte Chane et al 10/306,752 POTHIER 103(a) BANNER & WITCOFF , LTD EXAMINER AHLUWALIA, NAVNEET K

Thursday, January 19, 2012

johnston, altiris

REVERSED

1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1629 Ex Parte Huey et al 11/592,477 PRATS 103(a) KNOBBE MARTENS OLSON & BEAR LLP EXAMINER RAO, SAVITHA M

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1765 Ex Parte Barkac et al 11/113,682 PAK Concurring SMITH 102(e)/103(a) PPG INDUSTRIES, INC. EXAMINER SERGENT, RABON A

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2161 Ex Parte Dettinger et al 11/290,895 FRAHM 103(a) IBM CORPORATION EXAMINER PADMANABHAN, KAVITA

2164 Ex Parte Singh 10/882,721 FRAHM 101/103(a)/112(1) HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY EXAMINER MAHMOOD, REZWANUL

2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2821 Ex Parte Lagnado et al 11/344,296 CHANG 103(a) HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY EXAMINER KARACSONY, ROBERT

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3664 Ex Parte Brosius et al 11/044,708 HOELTER 102(e) LAW OFFICE OF DUANE S. KOBAYASHI EXAMINER MANCHO, RONNIE M

The Examiner further notes that both claims 10 and 31 contain ‘if’ clauses in their limitations (b) and (c) and states that they “are optional statements” such that they “do not narrow the claims because they can always be omitted” (Ans. 8-9, 13 citing MPEP § 2106 II C and In re Johnston, 435 F.3d 1381 (Fed. Cir. 2006))....
Regarding the “if” clauses found in limitations (b) and (c) of claims 10 and 31, we are not persuaded that these clauses are optional statements as noted by the Examiner (Ans. 8-9, 13). Optional statements include those limitations “stated in the permissive form ‘may’” as in Johnston (“said wall may be smooth”) and “do not narrow the claim because they can always be omitted” (Johnston 435 F.3d at 1384). Conditional statements, on the other hand, leave open the situation where the condition is not satisfied; but if the condition is satisfied, then a stated action occurs (Altiris, Inc. v. Symantec Corp, 318 F.3d 1363 (Fed. Cir. 2003)). In Altiris, the court stated that “[t]he body of the claims, by using conditional language in the ‘booting normally’ step (‘if said testing step indicates a normal boot sequence’) indicates that the ‘testing’ step must occur before the computer boots normally” (Altiris, 318 F.3d at 1372). The court continued stating that “[i]t is the result of this ‘testing’ step that determines whether the automation boot sequence….occurs, or whether the ‘booting normally’ step occurs” (Id.). This is consistent with MPEP § 2106 II C relied on by the Examiner which states “[l]anguage that suggests or makes optional but does not require steps to be performed…does not limit the scope of a claim” (italics added). Here, limitations (b) and (c) are not optional because if their condition is satisfied, these limitations require certain steps to be performed. For example, if the mobile terminal is in view of a communication satellite, then transmission of the location data to the satellite occurs and if the mobile terminal is in view of a more terrestrial cellular mobile telephone network, then transmission of the location data to a cell tower occurs. We thus disagree with the Examiner that limitations (b) and (c) of claim 10 are optional (i.e. are stated in the permissive form) as found in Johnston.

Altiris Inc. v. Symantec Corp., 318 F.3d 1363, 65 USPQ2d 1865 (Fed. Cir. 2003). . . 2111.01

AFFIRMED-IN-PART

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1731 Ex Parte Wickramanayake 11/239,728 TIMM 102(e)/103(a) nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting/103(a) HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY EXAMINER FAISON, VERONICA F


AFFIRMED

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1743 Ex Parte MONSHEIMER et al 11/671,820 GAUDETTE 103(a) OBLON, SPIVAK, MCCLELLAND MAIER & NEUSTADT, L.L.P. EXAMINER BROWN II, DAVID N

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2122 Ex Parte Keshavmurthy et al 10/623,330 DROESCH 102(b)/102(e) GIFFORD, KRASS, SPRINKLE,ANDERSON & CITKOWSKI, P.C EXAMINER BARNES-BULLOCK, CRYSTAL JOY

2159 Ex Parte Wilhelm 11/431,685 MANTIS MERCADER 103(a) IBM CORPORATION EXAMINER SOMERS, MARC S

2173 Ex Parte Seurig et al 11/315,381 SMITH 102(e)/103(a) Greg Goshorn, P.C. EXAMINER RIEGLER, PATRICK F

2187 Ex Parte Symanczyk et al 11/133,716 DROESCH 103(a) DICKE, BILLIG & CZAJA EXAMINER CYGIEL, GARY W

2600 Communications
2618 Ex Parte Jeong et al 10/914,451 HAHN 103(a) THE FARRELL LAW FIRM, P.C. EXAMINER CHAN, RICHARD

2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2816 Ex Parte Arndt et al 10/927,949 DANG 102(b)/103(a) Maginot, Moore & Beck LLP EXAMINER WELLS, KENNETH B

2822 Ex Parte Matsunami 11/426,157 DANG 103(a) TEXAS INSTRUMENTS INCORPORATED EXAMINER PATTON, PAUL E

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3731 Ex Parte McEwen et al 11/153,667 GRIMES 103(a) HANCOCK HUGHEY LLP EXAMINER MCEVOY, THOMAS M

REHEARING

DENIED

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2174 Ex Parte Taieb et al 11/426,100 JEFFERY 102 CAREY, RODRIGUEZ, GREENBERG & O''KEEFE, LLP STEVEN M. GREENBERG EXAMINER TILLERY, RASHAWN N

Wednesday, January 18, 2012

kropa

REVERSED

1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1649 Ex Parte Ishikawa et al 11/150,861 GRIMES ADAMS Dissenting PRATS 103(a) Workman Nydegger / INVENTION SCIENCE FUND EXAMINER DUTT, ADITI

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1735 Ex Parte Talwar 11/551,550 COLAIANNI FRANKLIN OWENS 103(a) DUKE W. YEE YEE & ASSOCIATES, P.C. EXAMINER YOON, KEVIN E

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2165 Ex Parte Opaterny 11/114,399 HUGHES BOALICK MACDONALD 102(b) SIEMENS CORPORATION EXAMINER BUCKINGHAM, KELLYE DEE

2400 Networking, Mulitplexing, Cable, and Security
2453 Ex Parte Nastacio et al 10/809,175 NAPPI DESHPANDE DROESCH 103(a) RSW IP Law IBM CORPORATION EXAMINER LINDSEY, MATTHEW S

2600 Communications
2612 Ex Parte Keller et al 09/842,346 NAPPI HAHN MACDONALD 102(e)/103(a) FITCH EVEN TABIN & FLANNERY EXAMINER BROWN, VERNAL U

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3643 Ex Parte Welbourne 11/318,279 SCHEINER 102(b)/103(a) Dascenzo Intellectual Property Law, P.C. EXAMINER PARSLEY, DAVID J

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3781 Ex Parte Da Silva et al 11/235,035 SPAHN 103(a) Harness Dickey & Pierce, P.L.C. EXAMINER MCKINLEY, CHRISTOPHER BRIAN

AFFIRMED-IN-PART

1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1611 Ex Parte Lee et al 11/111,240 ADAMS 102(a)/103(a) C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 103(a) HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY EXAMINER GHALI, ISIS A D

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2172 Ex Parte Best et al 09/747,063 POTHIER WINSOR ZECHER 103(a) 103(a)/112(1) SUGHRUE MION PLLC USPTO CUSTOMER NO WITH IBM/SVL EXAMINER PILLAI, NAMITHA

2184 Ex Parte Haines et al 11/348,636 RUGGIERO BAUMEISTER HOFF 103(a) 103(a) Fellers, Snider, Blankenship, Bailey & Tippens EXAMINER TSENG, CHENG YUAN

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3653 Ex Parte Tsuchiyama et al 10/580,211 GREENHUT CALVE HOELTER 102(b) 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 102(b) STAAS & HALSEY LLP EXAMINER SEVERSON, JEREMY R

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3751 Ex Parte Gueret 11/320,557 6,669,389 KAUFFMAN BARRETT SAINDON 251/102(b)/103(a) 102(b)/103(a) FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, GARRETT & DUNNER LLP EXAMINER NGUYEN, TUAN N

The subject matter of claim 204 is not all magnetic particles; rather, claim 204 covers magnetic particles that are part of a mascara product. Therefore, the preamble serves to further define the structure of the article claimed. See Kropa v. Robie, 187 F2d 150, 152 (CCPA 1951).

Kropa v. Robie, 187 F.2d 150, 88 USPQ 478 (CCPA 1951) . . . . . . . . . . . . 707.07(f), 2111.02

3762 Ex Parte Hanson et al 10/531,359 MILLS 102(b)/103(a) 103(a) PHILIPS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY & STANDARDS EXAMINER KAHELIN, MICHAEL WILLIAM

AFFIRMED

1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1657 Ex Parte Studin et al 11/788,959 ADAMS 103(a) Stuart D. Frenkel Frenkel & Associates EXAMINER SCHUBERG, LAURA J

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1731 Ex Parte Vacassy et al 11/491,612 COLAIANNI FRANKLIN OWENS 103(a) STEVEN WESEMAN CABOT MICROELECTRONICS CORPORATION EXAMINER CHRISTIE, ROSS J

1766 Ex Parte Thomas et al 12/281,023 GARRIS OWENS WARREN 103(a) OBLON, SPIVAK, MCCLELLAND MAIER & NEUSTADT, L.L.P. EXAMINER TOSCANO, ALICIA

1774 Ex Parte Jung et al 11/699,770 FRANKLIN COLAIANNI WARREN 102(b)/103(a) THE INVENTION SCIENCE FUND CLARENCE T. TEGREENE EXAMINER RAMDHANIE, BOBBY

1776 Ex Parte Broske et al 11/254,964 OWENS 102(e)/103(a) Agilent Technologies, Inc. in care of: CPA Global EXAMINER THERKORN, ERNEST G

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3667 Ex Parte Dudley et al 10/860,287 KIM 103(a) HUNTON & WILLIAMS LLP EXAMINER
GREENE, DANIEL LAWSON

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3734 Ex Parte Hansen et al 11/122,397 ADAMS SCHEINER WALSH 102(b) SEAGER, TUFTE & WICKHEM, LLC EXAMINER COLELLO, ERIN L

3761 Ex Parte Osborn et al 10/860,910 FRANKLIN FREDMAN GREEN 102(b)/103(a) THE PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY EXAMINER KIDWELL, MICHELE M

REEXAMINATION

EXAMINER AFFIRMED-IN-PART

3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU)
3733 Ex Parte 7128744 et al SMITH & NEPHEW, INC. Requester, Respondent v. SYNTHES (U.S.A) Patent Owner, Appellant 95/000,465 and 90/009,377 10/665,505 SONG LEBOVITZ ROBERTSON 103(a) 103(a) Patent Owner WOODCOCK WASHBURN LLP Third Party Requester ROBERT A, KING HUNTON & WILLIAMS, LLP EXAMINER REIP, DAVID OWEN original EXAMINER SWIGER III, JAMES L

EXAMINER AFFIRMED

3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU)
2819 Ex Parte 7161506 et al BLUE COAT SYSTEMS, INC. Respondent v. REALTIME DATA LLC. 95/000,479 SIU MacDONALD TORCZON 102(b)/102(e)/103(a) Patent Owner, Appellant Patent Owner STERN, KESSLER, GOLDSTEIN & FOXX P.L.L.C. Third Party Requester MICHAEL A. MESSINA, ESQ. MCDERMOTT, WILL & EMERY EXAMINER LEUNG, CHRISTINA Y original EXAMINER NGUYEN, LINH V

EXAMINER AFFIRMED

3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU)
2155 Ex Parte 7321937 et al BLUE COAT SYSTEMS, INC. Respondent v. REALTIME DATA LLC. Patent Owner, Appellant 95/000,466 SIU MacDONALD TORCZON 102(b)/102(e)/103(a) Patent Owner STERNE, KESSLER, GOLDSTEIN & FOXX P.L.L.C. Third Party Requester MCDERMOTT WILL & EMERY LLP EXAMINER HENEGHAN, MATTHEW E original EXAMINER ENG, DAVID Y

EXAMINER AFFIRMED

3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU)
2819 Ex Parte 7378992 et al BLUE COAT SYSTEMS, INC. Respondent v. REALTIME DATA LLC. Patent Owner, Appellant 95/000,478 SIU MacDONALD TORCZON 102(b)/102(e)/103(a) Patent Owner STERNE, KESSLER, GOLDSTEIN & FOX P.L.L.C. Third Party Requester MCDERMOTT WILL & EMERY LLP EXAMINER LEUNG, CHRISTINA Y original EXAMINER NGUYEN, LINH V

EXAMINER AFFIRMED

3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU)
2819 Ex Parte 6624761 et al BLUE COAT SYSTEMS, INC. Respondent v. REALTIME DATA LLC. Patent Owner, Appellant 95/000,464 SIU MacDONALD TORCZON 102(b)/102(e)/103(a) Patent Owner STERNE, KESSLER, GOLDSTEIN & FOX P.L.L.C. Third Party Requester MICHAEL A. MESSINA, ESQ. MCDERMOTT, WILL & EMERY EXAMINER LEUNG, CHRISTINA Y original EXAMINER WAMSLEY, PATRICK G

Monday, January 16, 2012

REVERSED

1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1627 Ex Parte Theobald et al 11/421,615 FREDMAN McCOLLUM PRATS 103(a) HOFFMANN & BARON, LLP EXAMINER CHONG, YONG SOO

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1745 Ex Parte Kertesz 11/299,345 NAGUMO HANLON KRATZ 103(a) LUCAS & MERCANTI, LLP EXAMINER BELL, WILLIAM P

1788 Ex Parte Smith et al 11/152,984 HASTINGS GAUDETTE NAGUMO 103(a) Siemens Corporation EXAMINER CHANG, VICTOR S

AFFIRMED

1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1618 Ex Parte Avramoff et al 10/575,809 McCOLLUM FREDMAN SCHEINER 103(a)/112(1) Graeser Associates International Inc. EXAMINER WESTERBERG, NISSA M


2600 Communications
2624 Ex Parte Lagrange et al 10/525,132 BAUMEISTER HAHN POTHIER 101/103(a) PHILIPS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY & STANDARDS EXAMINER BALI, VIKKRAM

REHEARING

GRANTED

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1782 Ex Parte Campbell et al 10/442,765 OWENS GARRIS GUEST 103(a) 37 C.F.R.
§ 41.50(b) 103(a) UNILEVER PATENT GROUP EXAMINER THAKUR, VIREN A

Friday, January 13, 2012

american academy, stumbo, bicon

REVERSED

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1729 Ex Parte Mikhail et al 11/196,632 GARRIS 102(b)/103(a) MILLER IP GROUP, PLC GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION EXAMINER YANCHUK, STEPHEN J

2600 Communications
2612 Ex Parte Sturm 11/926,244 WINSOR 102(b) CROWELL & MORING LLP EXAMINER WANG, JACK K

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3643 Ex Parte Blette et al 10/939,540 SPAHN 103(a) 3M INNOVATIVE PROPERTIES COMPANY EXAMINER POON, PETER M

See In re Am. Acad. of Sci. Tech. Ctr., 367 F.3d 1359, 1364 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (We determine the scope of the claims in patent applications not solely on the basis of the claim language, but upon giving claims their broadest reasonable construction in light of the specification as it would be interpreted by one of ordinary skill in the art.).

American Academy of Science Tech. Center, In re, 367 F.3d 1359, 70 USPQ2d 1827 (Fed. Cir. 2004) . . . . . 2111, 2111.01

See Bicon Inc. v. Straumann Co., 441 F.3d 945, 950 (Fed. Cir. 2006) (Claims are construed with an eye toward giving effect to all terms in the claim.).

See Stumbo v. Eastman Outdoors, Inc., 508 F.3d 1358, 1362 (Fed. Cir. 2007) (denouncing claim constructions which render phrases in claims superfluous).

3644 Ex Parte Freidell 11/338,221 SAINDON 102(b)/103(a) Mark P. Stone EXAMINER WILLIAMS, MONICA L


AFFIRMED-IN-PART

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1733 Ex Parte Cameron et al 10/517,906 GARRIS 103(a) 103(a) The BOC Group, Inc. EXAMINER YANG, JIE

REEXAMINATION

EXAMINER AFFIRMED-IN-PART & REVERSED-IN-PART

3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU)
3749 Ex Parte 6886553 et al Ex parte HEATMAX, INC. Patent Owner and Appellant 90/008,869 DELMENDO 102(b)/103(a) 102(b)/103(a) PATENT OWNER: THOMAS, KAYDEN, HORSTEMEYER & RISLEY, LLP THIRD-PARTY REQUESTER: WILLIAM L. BROOKS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY PRACTICE GROUPEXAMINER WILLIAMS, CATHERINE SERKE original EXAMINER YEUNG, JAMES C

AFFIRMED

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1721 Ex Parte Pickering 11/445,360 HASTINGS 103(a) MDIP LLC EXAMINER VAJDA, PETER L

1747 Ex Parte Ueyoko et al 11/592,893 KATZ 103(a) THE GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY EXAMINER FISCHER, JUSTIN R

1778 Ex Parte Benevides et al 11/211,066 GARRIS 112(2)/103(a) Waters Technologies Corporation EXAMINER THERKORN, ERNEST G

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2163 Ex Parte Egnor et al 11/024,967 SMITH 103(a) HARRITY & HARRITY, LLP EXAMINER HWA, SHYUE JIUNN

2179 Ex Parte Lee et al 10/743,476 ZECHER 102(b) THE FARRELL LAW FIRM, P.C. EXAMINER LO, WEILUN

2186 Ex Parte Kuwata 11/372,198 DANG 103(a) MCGINN INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW GROUP, PLLC EXAMINER DUDEK JR, EDWARD J

2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2813 Ex Parte Shih et al 10/703,762 RUGGIERO 102(e)/103(a) HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY EXAMINER SMOOT, STEPHEN W

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3685 Ex Parte Gaetano 10/641,853 FISCHETTI 103(a) 37 CFR § 41.50(b) 103(a) MITEL NETWORKS CORPORATION EXAMINER AGWUMEZIE, CHARLES C

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3731 Ex Parte Venturelli 10/538,913 GREEN 103(a) MEDTRONIC VASCULAR, INC. EXAMINER MCEVOY, THOMAS M

3751 Ex Parte Aylward 11/421,624 BAHR 103(a) ALSTON & BIRD LLP EXAMINER NIESZ, JASON KAROL

REHEARING

DENIED

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3732 Ex Parte Golden 11/095,355 HOELTER 102(b) GIFFORD, KRASS, SPRINKLE, ANDERSON & CITKOWSKI, P.C EXAMINER MAI, HAO D

Thursday, January 12, 2012

unigene

REVERSED

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3627 Ex Parte Heath 11/112,288 KIM 112(2)/102(b)/103(a) Starkweather and Associates EXAMINER AMSDELL, DANA

3629 Ex Parte Bohle 10/772,081 FETTING 103(a) SAP / FINNEGAN, HENDERSON LLP EXAMINER SENSENIG, SHAUN D

3629 Ex Parte Jannott et al 10/960,834 FISCHETTI 102(e)/103(a) BUCKLEY, MASCHOFF & TALWALKAR LLC EXAMINER CUMARASEGARAN, VERN

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3731 Ex Parte Pai et al 10/982,385 PRATS 103(a) Vista IP Law Group LLP EXAMINER SEVERSON, RYAN J

Thus, “[o]bviousness requires more than a mere showing that the prior art includes separate references covering each separate limitation in a claim under examination.” Unigene Laboratories, Inc. v. Apotex, Inc., 655 F.3d 1352, 1360 (Fed. Cir. 2011).

3732 Ex Parte Jia et al 11/676,807 MILLS 103(a) CANTOR COLBURN LLP EXAMINER LEWIS, RALPH A

3733 Ex Parte Burgess et al 11/264,522 FREDMAN 102(a)/103(a) Maginot, Moore & Beck LLP EXAMINER CARTER, TARA ROSE E


REEXAMINATION

EXAMINER AFFIRMED

3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU)
3672 Ex Parte 7096977 et al Varco I/P, Inc. Patent Owner and Appellant v. Tesco Corporation Requester 95/000,162 11/040,453 ROBERTSON 112(1)/112(2)/102(b)/103(a) PATENT OWNER: THE MATTHEWS FIRM THIRD-PARTY REQUESTER: ANDREWS KURTH LLP (3RD PTY REQ) EXAMINER FOSTER, JIMMY G original CHRISTIE, PARKER & HALE, LLP EXAMINER NEUDER, WILLIAM P

AFFIRMED

2400 Networking, Mulitplexing, Cable, and Security
2494 Ex Parte Hidalgo et al 09/859,123 MacDONALD 103(a) IBM CORPORATION EXAMINER KHOSHNOODI, NADIA

2600 Communications
2611 Ex Parte Wu et al 10/603,302 MacDONALD 103(a) TEXAS INSTRUMENTS INCORPORATED EXAMINER JOSEPH, JAISON

2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2893 Ex Parte Slater et al 10/916,113 SAADAT 112(1)/102(b)/103(a) MYERS BIGEL SIBLEY & SAJOVEC EXAMINER QUACH, TUAN N

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3643 Ex Parte Moharram 10/935,392 GREEN 103(a) OMAYMA E. MOHARRAM EXAMINER PARSLEY, DAVID J

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3766 Ex Parte Carroll 11/198,386 HORNER 103(a) BLANK ROME LLP EXAMINER GEDEON, BRIAN T

Wednesday, January 11, 2012

dance, perfect web, vaidyanathan, KSR

REVERSED

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1776 Ex Parte Carson et al 10/510,865 GAUDETTE 103(a) General Electric Company EXAMINER SAVAGE, MATTHEW O

Evidence of obviousness must come from the prior art, not the applicant’s own disclosure. In re Dance, 160 F.3d 1339, 1343 (Fed. Cir. 1998). “[T]o invoke ‘common sense’ or any other basis for extrapolating from prior art to a conclusion of obviousness,” the fact finder “must articulate [his or her] reasoning with sufficient clarity for review.” Perfect Web Technologies, Inc. v. InfoUSA, Inc., 587 F.3d 1324, 1330 (Fed. Cir. 2009)); see also, In re Vaidyanathan, 381 Fed.Appx. 985, 994 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (non-precedential) (“KSR did not free the PTO’s examination process from explaining its reasoning. In making an obviousness rejection, the examiner should not rely on conclusory statements that a particular feature of the invention would have been obvious or was well known. Instead, the examiner should elaborate, discussing the evidence or reasoning that leads the examiner to such a conclusion.”).

Dance, In re, 160 F.3d 1339, 48 USPQ2d 1635 (Fed. Cir. 1998) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2143.01

KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 USPQ2d 1385 (2007) . . . . . . . . .2141 to 2145, 2216, 2242, 2286, 2616, 2642, 2686.04

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2183 Ex Parte Davis et al 11/132,658 DESHPANDE 103(a) IBM Corporation EXAMINER PARTRIDGE, WILLIAM B

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3734 Ex Parte Anderson et al 11/444,004 FREDMAN 102(b) Covidien EXAMINER TRUONG, KEVIN THAO


AFFIRMED-IN-PART

2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2814 Ex Parte Melzak et al 10/914,468 ROBERTSON 103(a) 103(a) DEMONT & BREYER, LLC EXAMINER PHAM, LONG

AFFIRMED

1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1611 Ex Parte Huang et al 11/556,322 GREEN 103(a) PHILIP S. JOHNSON JOHNSON & JOHNSON EXAMINER PURDY, KYLE A

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1728 Ex Parte Trabold et al 12/016,014 OWENS 112(2)/102(b)/103(a) MILLER IP GROUP, PLC GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION EXAMINER CHAN, HENG M

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2183 Ex Parte Chauvel et al 10/830,917 DANG 103(a) TEXAS INSTRUMENTS INCORPORATED EXAMINER FENNEMA, ROBERT E

2185 Ex Parte Loafman 11/778,054 JEFFERY 103(a)/non-statutory obviousness-type double patenting IBM CORP. (AUS) C/O THE LAW OFFICE OF JAMES BAUDINO, PLLC EXAMINER DOAN, DUC T

2400 Networking, Mulitplexing, Cable, and Security
2478 Ex Parte Kataoka 11/291,129 WINSOR 103(a) IBM CORP. (WSM) c/o WINSTEAD P.C. EXAMINER BEHARRY, NOEL R

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3754 Ex Parte Tolbert 10/998,213 BAHR 102(b)/103(a) CHRISTIE, PARKER & HALE, LLP EXAMINER WILLIAMS, STEPHANIE ELAINE

3762 Ex Parte Haller et al 11/221,095 FREDMAN 103(a) Wong, Cabello, Lutsch, Rutherford & Brucculeri LLP (Boston Scientific) EXAMINER MANUEL, GEORGE C