SEARCH

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

Wednesday, May 11, 2016

wertheim

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2132 Ex Parte Fulton 13431976 - (D) HAMANN 103 Nelson and Nelson VERBRUGGE, KEVIN

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3633 Ex Parte Sareyka 13694393 - (D) MURPHY 102 JACKSON AND CHOVANES A, PHI DIEU TRAN

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3714 Ex Parte Ohta 11514935 - (D) GUIJT 103 NIXON & VANDERHYE, PC RENWICK, REGINALD A

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2835 Ex Parte Thomas 12929424 - (D) PER CURIAM 103 103 NIXON & VANDERHYE, PC MILLISER, THERON S

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3711 Ex Parte Lutnick et al 11459254 - (D) HOFFMANN 112(1) 103 CANTOR FITZGERALD, L.P. PIERCE, WILLIAM M

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1764 Ex Parte Tang et al 11368755 - (D) DELMENDO 112(1)/102/103 NATH, GOLDBERG & MEYER HUHN, RICHARD A

We agree with the Examiner's finding (Ans. 6) that m < n encompasses any values of m and n, including values well beyond the originally disclosed numerical values. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 263-264 (CCPA 1976) ("By pointing to the fact that claim I reads on embodiments outside the scope of the description, the PTO has satisfied its burden.) ...

In view of the Examiner's specific findings and the Appellants' reliance on "m < n" as a basis for patentability (discussed infra in Rejection III), we find that the Examiner satisfied the initial burden of establishing that the broad ranges for m and n as described in the original disclosure in combination with the exemplified polymers are not sufficiently descriptive of the presently recited "m < n " and thus hold that the claim does not comply with written description requirement as required by 35 U.S.C. § 112,  l . See Wertheim, 541 F.2d at 265 ("[w]here it is clear, for instance, that the broad described range pertains to a different invention than the narrower (and subsumed) claimed range, then the broader range does not describe the narrower range"). 

Wertheim, In re, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976) 706.03(o) ,   1302.01 ,   2144.05 ,   2163 ,   2163.03 ,   2163.04 ,   2163.05

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2448 Ex Parte Murray et al 12292745 - (D) SHIANG 103 Gowling WLG (Canada) LLP STRANGE, AARON N

2491 Ex Parte Choi et al 11545507 - (D) BAER 103 SUGHRUE MION, PLLC EDWARDS, LINGLAN E

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3741 Ex Parte Yilmaz et al 11946892 - (D) KINDER 112(1) 103 GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY GOYAL, ARUN

REHEARING

DENIED
Tech Center 2600 Communications
2689 Ex Parte Raghavan et al 12454622 - (D) ULLAGADDI 103 FLYNN, THIEL, BOUTELL & TANIS, P.C. MEHMOOD, JENNIFER

No comments :