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

Search This Blog

Loading...

Monday, January 7, 2013

beattie, perreira, genentech, koito

custom search

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3733 Ex Parte Senn et al 11221648 - (D) FREDMAN 102/103 102/103 Fay Kaplun & Marcin, LLP COTRONEO, STEVEN J

3775 Ex Parte Richelsoph et al 10730210 - (D) BONILLA 102/103 obviousness-type double patenting RATNERPRESTIA NELSON, CHRISTINE L

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1616 Ex Parte SenGupta et al 11345064 - (D) WALSH 103 MARSHALL, GERSTEIN & BORUN LLP KARPINSKI, LUKE E

1627 Ex Parte Harbige et al 10756761 - (D) JENKS 103 BROWN RUDNICK LLP KANTAMNENI, SHOBHA

“An expert opinion is no better than the soundness of the reasons supporting it.” Perreira v. Secretary of the Dept. of HHS, 33 F.3d 1375, 1377 (Fed. Cir. 1994); In re Beattie, 974 F.2d 1309, 1313 (Fed. Cir. 1992) (opinion evidence in declarations has little value without factual support).

Beattie, In re, 974 F.2d 1309, 24 USPQ2d 1040 (Fed. Cir. 1992) 716.01(c), 2145

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2829 Ex Parte Peidous 11781664 - (D) WHITEHEAD, JR. 102 FARJAMI & FARJAMI LLP SENGDARA, VONGSAVANH

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3641 Ex Parte Aylor 11706676 - (D) RICE 112(1)/102/103 ROBERT B. AYLOR ABDOSH, SAMIR

“Section 112 requires that the patent specification enable ‘those skilled in the art to make and use the full scope of the claimed invention without ‘undue experimentation”’ in order to extract meaningful disclosure of the invention and, by this disclosure, advance the technical arts. Koito Mfg. Co., Ltd. v. Turn-Key-Tech, LLC, 381 F.3d 1142, 1155 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (quoting Genentech, Inc. v. Novo Nordisk A/S, 108 F.3d 1361, 1365 (Fed.Cir.1997) (citation omitted)).

Genentech, Inc. v. Novo Nordisk A/S, 108 F.3d 1361, 42 USPQ2d 1001 (Fed. Cir. 1997) 2161.01

No comments :