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

Search This Blog

Loading...

Friday, April 25, 2014

KSR

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 2600 Communications
2646 Ex Parte Hillyard et al 11018973 - (D) HOMERE 103 McDermott Will & Emery LLP (Broadcom) IQBAL, KHAWAR

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2856 Ex Parte Fleischer 12479246 - (D) KAISER 103 LERNER GREENBERG STEMER LLP WEST, PAUL M

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3742 Ex Parte Walker et al 11688294 - (D) BROWN 103 DICKINSON WRIGHT PLLC PATEL, VINOD D

The Examiner also stated that the combination of Minegishi and Ripma is proper and, in  support, listed every one of the seven exemplary rationales (A)-(G) that may support a conclusion of prima facie obviousness as set forth in Manual of Patent Examining Prodecure (MPEP) 2143(I). However, this section states "[a]ny rationale employed must provide a link between the factual findings and the legal conclusion of obviousness."  Id.2  here the Examiner did not provide such a link for any one of the rationales (A)-(G), but merely listed the rationales.  See Id.

2 This section also states "[i]t is important for Office personnel to recognize that when they do choose to formulate an obviousness rejection using one of the rationales suggested by the Supreme Court in KSR and discussed herein, they are to adhere to the guidance provided regarding the necessary factual findings. It remains Office policy that appropriate factual findings are required in order to apply the enumerated rationales properly."

Accordingly we agree with Applicant that the Exminer did not establish a prima facie case of obviousness for Claim 15. 

AFFIRMED-IN-PART 
Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2857 Ex Parte Burgess 12041801 - (D) NAGUMO 103 103 MYERS BIGEL SIBLEY & SAJOVEC, P. A. SCHECHTER, ANDREW M

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3629 Ex Parte Pugh et al 11057097 - (D) CRAWFORD 112(2)/103 101/103 KIRTON & McCONKIE CHUMPITAZ, BOBR

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2169 Ex Parte Daum et al 11848063 - (D) BUI 102/103 BLAKELY SOKOLOFF TAYLOR & ZAFMAN SAEED, USMAAN

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2431 Ex Parte MRAIHI 11407996 - (D) BUI 103 Lowenstein Sandler LLP ZECHER, CORDELIA P K

2451 Ex Parte Pazhyannur et al 12046528 - (D) DANG 103 MOTOROLA SOLUTIONS, INC. TIV, BACKHEAN

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2828 Ex Parte Ohta et al 12230364 - (D) PAK 103 Harness, Dickey & Pierce P.L.C. KING, JOSHUA

REEXAMINATION

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2175 APPLE, INC., EBAY, INC., FACEBOOK, INC., NETFLIX, INC., OFFICE DEPOT, INC., STAPLES, INC., and YAHOO!, INC. Requesters, Appellants, and Cross-Respondents v. INTERVAL LICENSING LLC Patent Owner, Respondent, and Cross-Appellant 95001576 6757682 09/656,638 JEFFERY 102/103/112(1)/112(2) 112(4) EDELL, SHAPIRO & FINNAN, LLC For THIRD PARTY REQUESTOR: SCHWEGMAN LUNDBERG & WOESSNER/DEFENSE GROUP HUGHES, DEANDRA M original RONES, CHARLES

No comments :