Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2886 Ex Parte Wang 12298762 - (D) ROESEL 103 HANCOCK HUGHEY LLP PAJOOHI GOMEZ, TARA S
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1711 Ex Parte Gray et al 11280021 - (D) LEBOVITZ 102 103/112(2) BARLOW, JOSEPHS & HOLMES, LTD. MARKOFF, ALEXANDER
We identified where Gray discloses creating a vacuum to produce vapor bubbles as recited in the claim. It is true that the result of “transferring said chemical agent to the surface of said object while said chemical agent is in a vapor state” is not expressly described in Gray. However, this is simply a recitation of the result of “creating a vacuum.” A clause that “merely states the result of the limitations in the claim adds nothing to the patentability or substance of the claim.” Texas Instruments Inc. v. Int’l Trade Comm’n, 988 F.2d 1165, 1172 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
For the foregoing reasons, the rejection of claim 11 as obvious in view of Gray is affirmed. Claims 12, 14–16, 18–19, and 21 were not argued separately and fall with claim 11.
Texas Instruments, Inc. v. Int’l Trade Comm’n, 988 F.2d 1165, 26 USPQ2d 1018 (Fed. Cir. 1993)
Tech Center 2600 Communications
2685 Ex Parte Nacey 11221418 - (D) STRAUSS 103 FERENCE & ASSOCIATES LLC TRIEU, VAN THANH