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

Search This Blog

Loading...

Tuesday, April 23, 2013

aslanian, in re merck, keller, klosak, mcclain, fout, siebentritt

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1729 Ex Parte Young et al 11853855 - (D) HASTINGS 103 37 C.F.R. 41.50(b) 102 FRASER CLEMENS MARTIN & MILLER LLC DUDLEY, ARCHER DAVIS

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1755 Ex Parte Weiss et al 12288560 - (D) HANLON 103 103 M.P. Williams PILLAY, DEVINA

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3643 Ex Parte Muthiah et al 10873501 - (D) HORNER 103 103 GERALD K. WHITE & ASSOCIATES, P.C. NGUYEN, SON T

See also In re Aslanian, 590 F.2d 911, 914 (CCPA 1979) (“a drawing in a utility patent can be cited against the claims of a utility patent application even though the feature shown in the drawing was unintended or unexplained in the specification of the reference patent.”) (citations omitted).

Aslanian, In re, 590 F.2d 911, 200 USPQ 500 (CCPA 1979) 2125

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design

3774 Ex Parte Ryan et al 12059495 - (D) SPAHN 102/103 103 Medtronic, Inc. (CRDM) MATTHEWS, WILLIAM H

We are not persuaded by Appellants’ arguments because one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on a combination of references. See In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 1097 (Fed. Cir. 1986); In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 425 (CCPA 1981).

Merck & Co., Inc., In re, 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986) 707.07(f), 716.02,  2143.02,  2144.08,  2144.09, 2145

Keller, In re, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981) 707.07(f), 2145

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1729 Ex Parte Skinlo 10665687 - (D) HASTINGS 103 QUALLION LLC RUDDOCK, ULA CORINNA

1762 Ex Parte Stueven et al 12438835 - (D) McKELVEY 103 MARSHALL, GERSTEIN & BORUN LLP ENG, ELIZABETH

In order to rely on an alleged expected result (or a "substantial effect"), applicant must show that it in fact gets that result. In re Klosak, 455 F.2d 1077, 1080 (CCPA 1972) (inventor must show that the results the inventor says the inventor gets with the invention are actually obtained with the invention). See also McClain v. Ortmayer, 141 U.S. 419, 429 (1891) (conclusive evidence needed to establish new function).

1763 Ex Parte Okada et al 12531655 - (D) McKELVEY 102/103 Styron/BHGL USELDING, JOHN E

1771 Ex Parte Nguyen et al 12019276 - (D) NAGUMO 102/103 Mossman, Kumar and Tyler, PC STEIN, MICHELLE

1774 Ex Parte Zetlmeisl et al 11601401 - (D) METZ 103 Mossman, Kumar and Tyler, PC ROBINSON, RENEE E

1784 Ex Parte Munro et al 11758765 - (D) NAGUMO 103 PPG INDUSTRIES INC MCNEIL, JENNIFER C

1785 Ex Parte Hood 11546067 - (D) OBERMANN 103 INTERNATIONAL SPECIALTY PRODUCTS SHEWAREGED, BETELHEM

Where two known alternatives are interchangeable for a desired function, an express suggestion to substitute one for the other is not needed to render a substitution obvious. In re Fout, 675 F.2d 297, 301 (CCPA 1982); In re Siebentritt, 372 F.2d 566, 568 (CCPA 1967).

Fout, In re, 675 F.2d 297, 213 USPQ 532 (CCPA 1982) 2129, 2143.01, 2144.06

1791 Ex Parte Ikuina et al 11498154 - (D) GAUDETTE 103 BUCHANAN, INGERSOLL & ROONEY PC PADEN, CAROLYN A

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2167 Ex Parte Lim 11615637 - (D) DANG 103 AKA CHAN LLP REYES, MARIELA D

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2421 Ex Parte Lee 11353584 - (D) MANTIS MERCADER 103 THE DIRECTV GROUP, INC. PARRY, CHRISTOPHER L

2477 Ex Parte Sadot 11238924 - (D) EVANS 102/103 Cochran Freund & Young/ AVAYA, Inc. ZHOU, YONG

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2829 Ex Parte SONG et al 11564760 - (D) WHITEHEAD, JR. 103 VOLENTINE & WHITT PLLC CHI, SUBERR L

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3777 Ex Parte McGee 11117022 - (D) WALSH 112(1)/103 SEAGER, TUFTE & WICKHEM, LLC LUONG, PETER
 
REEXAMINATION  

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU)
2863 GARRY IAN HOLLOWAY Requester and Appellant v. GEMOLOGICAL INSTITUTE OF AMERICA, INC. Patent Owner and Respondent 95001542 7,571,060 10/952,386 SIU 102/103 DLA PIPER US LLP NASSER, ROBERT L original LE, JOHN H

No comments :