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

Search This Blog

Loading...

Friday, March 28, 2014

huang, cable, baxter travenol

custom search

REVERSED 
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1766 Ex Parte Attarwala et al 12562603 - (D) PAK concurring-in-part SMITH 102 Henkel Corporation DOLLINGER, MICHAEL M

1776 Ex Parte Hecker 12116545 - (D) KOKOSKI 102/103 Jason P. Webb SMITH, DUANE

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2156 Ex Parte Dexter et al 12035587 - (D) LORIN 103 MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP (PA) AL HASHEMI, SANA A

2166 Ex Parte Patton 10857343 - (D) DESHPANDE 102 SCHWEGMAN, LUNDBERG & WOESSNER, P.A. PHAM, KHANH B

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2675 Ex Parte Nielsen et al 11261130 - (D) FRANKLIN 103 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY HON, MING Y

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2881 Ex Parte Hong 11809715 - (D) FRANKLIN 103 Scheinberg & Associates, PC IPPOLITO, NICOLE MARIE

3638 Ex Parte Dickert 12180247 - (D) SMEGAL 103 41.50(b) 112(2) MCANDREWS HELD & MALLOY, LTD KIM, SHIN H

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3724 Ex Parte Hall 12657364 - (D) ASTORINO 103 HUDAK, SHUNK & FARINE, CO., L.P.A. CHOI, STEPHEN

3745 Ex Parte Erickson et al 11548791 - (D) BROWNE 103 Sutherland GE NGUYEN, NINH H

3766 Ex Parte Bonde et al 11739982 - (D) McCOLLUM 103 SHUMAKER & SIEFFERT , P.A MALAMUD, DEBORAH LESLIE

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1622 Ex Parte Ding et al 11966894 - (D) JENKS 102 SEED INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW GROUP PLLC YOO, SUN JAE

Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1711 Ex Parte Korolik et al 12555217 - (D) SMITH 112(1)/112(2)/102/103/obviousness-type double patenting MPG, LLP and Lam Research Corp. MARKOFF, ALEXANDER

1783 Ex Parte Fensel et al 11651976 - (D) KIMLIN 103 FAY SHARPE LLP VAN SELL, NATHAN L

1791 Ex Parte Ledon et al 11910718 - (D) SMITH 103 American Air Liquide, Inc. BADR, HAMID R

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2425 Ex Parte McDonough 11241819 - (D) RUGGiERO 103 PROSKAUER ROSE LLP STRONCZER, RYAN S

2453 Ex Parte Lioy et al 11193068 - (D) EVANS 101/102/103 QUALCOMM INCORPORATED GEORGANDELLIS, ANDREW C

2476 Ex Parte Pierce 11914269 - (D) DILLON 103 PHILIPS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY & STANDARDS SLOMS, NICHOLAS

2491 Ex Parte Suzuki 11653424 - (D) EVANS 103 Studebaker & Brackett PC LAGOR, ALEXANDER

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2613 Ex Parte Ryan et al 11513357 - (D) McCARTNEY 103 Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C. MA, TIZE

2683 Ex Parte Meyer 11557001 - (D) DIXON 103 WILLIAMS, MORGAN & AMERSON YANG, JAMES J

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3737 Ex Parte Saad et al 11576488 - (D) PER CURIAM 102/103 PHILIPS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY & STANDARDS CWERN, JONATHAN

REEXAMINATION

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2472 Ex parte ROUND ROCK RESEARCH, LLC 90012114 RE41,531 11/859,364 HUGHES 103 GAZDZINSKI & ASSOCIATES, PC YIGDALL, MICHAEL J original NGUYEN, BRIAN D

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2632 ENVISIONWARE, INC. Requester v. 3M COMPANY and 3M INNOVATIVE PROPERTIES COMPANY Patent Owner and Appellant 95001344 6486780 09/619,220 CURCURI, 103 SUGHRUE, MION, ZINN, MACPEAK & SEAS LEUNG, CHRISTINA Y original MULLEN, THOMAS J

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3691 GOOGLE, INC. and MICROSOFT CORP. Requesters and Respondents, v. PAID SEARCH ENGINE TOOLS, LLC Patent Owner and Appellant. 95001863 7,974,912 11/379,897 HOFF 102/103 WOOD, HERRON & EVANS, LLP WORJLOH, JALATEE original AKINTOLA, OLABODE

Our reviewing court has noted in the past that evidence related solely to the number of units sold provides a very weak showing of commercial success, if any. See In re Huang, 100 F.3d 135, 137 (Fed. Cir. 1996); Cable Elec. Prods., Inc. v. Genmark, Inc., 770 F.2d 1015, 1026-27 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (finding that sales of 5 million units represents a minimal showing of commercial success because “[w]ithout further economic evidence . . . it would be improper to infer that the reported sales represent a substantial share of any definable market”); see also In re Baxter Travenol Lab., 952 F.2d 388, 392 (Fed. Cir. 1991).

Huang, In re, 100 F.3d 135, 40 USPQ2d 1685 (Fed. Cir. 1996) 716.03716.03(b)2145

Cable Electric Products, Inc. v. Genmark, Inc., 770 F.2d 1015, 226 USPQ 881 (Fed. Cir. 1985)  716.03(b),   716.06,   1504.03

Baxter Travenol Labs., In re, 952 F.2d 388, 21 USPQ2d 1281 (Fed. Cir. 1991) 2131.012145

No comments :