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

Search This Blog

Loading...

Monday, November 9, 2015

catalina, superior industries, hewlett-packard, roberts, paragon

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 2600 Communications
2667 Ex Parte Ohi 12519152 - (D) WINSOR 102/103 Cheng Law Group, PLLC YANG, WEI WEN

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3722 Ex Parte Memmolo et al 10575988 - (D) SCHOPFER 103 SCULLY, SCOTT, MURPHY & PRESSER, P.C. SINGH, SUNIL K

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2443 Ex Parte Vasisht 10740762 - (D) HUME 103 103 NELSON MULLINS RILEY & SCARBOROUGH LLP MIRZA, ADNAN M

Our reviewing court guides that the patentability of an apparatus claim "depends on the claimed structure, not on the use or purpose of that structure." Catalina Marketing Int'l. Inc. v. Coolsavings.com, Inc., 289 F.3d 801, 809 (Fed. Cir. 2002); see also Superior Industries, Inc. v. Masaba, Inc., 553 Fed.Appx. 986, 991 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (Rader, J., concurring) which guides:
[A] system claim generally covers what the system is, not what the system does. Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1468 (Fed. Cir. 1990); see also Roberts v. Ryer, 91 U.S. 150, 157 [] (1875) ("The inventor of a machine is entitled to the benefit of all the uses to which it can be put, no matter whether he had conceived the idea of the use or not.") Thus, it is usually improper to construe non-functional claim terms in system claims in a way that makes infringement or validity turn on their function. Paragon Solutions, LLC v. Timex Corp., 566 F.3d 1075, 1091 (Fed. Cir. 2009) [5]

5 Superior Industries is a non-precedential opinion of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. However, we consider the concurring opinion by former Chief Judge Rader as guiding because it cites precedential authority in support.

Catalina Mktg. Int’l v. Coolsavings.com, Inc., 289 F.3d 801, 62 USPQ2d 1781(Fed. Cir. 2002) 2111.02
Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 15 USPQ2d 1525 (Fed. Cir. 1990) 2114

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1637 Ex Parte Reynolds 12297327 - (D) ADAMS 103 SIEMENS CORPORATION TUNG, JOYCE

Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1793 Ex Parte Hansa et al 13130207 - (D) HEANEY 103 Carstens & Cahoon, LLP TRAN, LIEN THUY

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2457 Ex Parte Doyle et al 12828245 - (D) THOMAS 101/103 CRGO LAW STEVEN M. GREENBERG KIM, HEE SOO

2493 Ex Parte BALLARD 12350881 - (D) BEAMER 103 VERIZON LESNIEWSKI, VICTOR D

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2642 Ex Parte Schaepperle et al 12323864 - (D) BARRY 103 FAY SHARPE/LUCENT KHAN, SUHAIL

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3628 Ex Parte Kwit 11365042 - (D) MOHANTY 103 MCAFEE & TAFT CHEN, GEORGE YUNG CHIEH

REHEARING

DENIED
Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2881 Ex Parte Hoyes 11996236 - (D) SMITH 102/103 Diederiks & Whitelaw, PLC IPPOLITO, NICOLE MARIE

No comments :