SEARCH

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

Friday, January 29, 2016

young, keller

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1637 Ex Parte Seitz 12095485 - (D) GRIMES 103 CHALKER FLORES, LLP CHUNDURU, SURYAPRABHA

Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1722 Ex Parte Rock et al 13088792 - (D) SMITH 103 FRASER CLEMENS MARTIN & MILLER LLC CHACKO DAVIS, DABORAH

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2473 Ex Parte KOLAKERI et al 11862126 - (D) FENICK 103 VERIZON DUDA, ADAM K

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2621 Ex Parte Skantze et al 10516594 - (D) McCARTNEY 102/103 FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, GARRETT & DUNNER LLP JOSEPH, DENNIS P

2624 Ex Parte Chin et al 12594500 - (D) SHIANG 103 NIXON & VANDERHYE, PC AU, SCOTT D

2649 Ex Parte Venkatraman et al 12936409 - (D) CRAIG 103 Meyertons, Hood, Kivlin, Kowert & G (Apple) RACHEDINE, MOHAMMED

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2844 Ex Parte Hollis 12436683 - (D) FRANKLIN 102 FLETCHER YODER (MICRON TECHNOLOGY, INC.) LO, CHRISTOPHER KWOK YEUNG

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3657 Ex Parte EPPLE 12960099 - (D) MURPHY 103 KENYON & KENYON LLP WILLIAMS, THOMAS J

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3731 Ex Parte Abi-Kheirs 11284735 - (D) STEPINA 103 Fay Kaplun & Marcin, LLP -- BSC SIMPSON, SARAH A

3753 Ex Parte Engler et al 12823289 - (D) SCHOPFER 103 REINHART BOERNER VAN DEUREN P.C. BARRY, DAPHNE MARIE

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1615 Ex Parte Dobler 13136777 - (D) CHANG 103 103 Paul M. Denk AHMED, HASAN SYED

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2696 Ex Parte Ben-David et al 10588755 - (D) WINSOR 103 102/103 Pearl Cohen Zedek Latzer Baratz LLP GHEBRETINSAE, TEMESGHEN

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3753 Ex Parte Geoffrion et al 11561864 - (D) FISCHETTI 103 103 Moser Taboada / Applied Materials, Inc. MCCALISTER, WILLIAM M

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1621 Ex Parte Bowman et al 12399729 - (D) MILLS 103 MCDERMOTT WILL & EMERY LLP FAY, ZOHREH A

1651 Ex Parte Adamczyk et al 12174887 - (D) MILLS 103 ABBOTT LABORATORIES GOUGH, TIFFANY MAUREEN

1673 Ex Parte Snyder et al 12773041 - (D) CHANG 102/103 Eli Lilly and Company PESELEV, ELLI

Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1731 Ex Parte Peng et al 12344857 - (D) GARRIS 103 MILLEN, WHITE, ZELANO & BRANIGAN, P.C. ABU ALI, SHUANGYI

1746 Ex Parte Winget et al 12104703 - (D) SMITH 103 BROOKS KUSHMAN P.C. BLADES, JOHN A

1772 Ex Parte Reagan et al 12510806 - (D) KAISER 103 Johnson Matthey Inc. MCCAIG, BRIAN A

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2121 Ex Parte Wang et al 12355894 - (D) BAER 102/103 SLATER & MATSIL, L.L.P. CHANG, SUNRAY

2127 Ex Parte Kohanek et al 12632927 - (D) McCARTNEY 102 GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP BOOKER, KELVIN

2175 Ex Parte Holbrook et al 11807039 - (D) WINSOR 103 FOLEY & LARDNER LLP DISTEFANO, GREGORY A

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2426 Ex Parte Hartung et al 12376743 - (D) MacDONALD 103 ERICSSON INC. ALAM, MUSHFIKH I

2426 Ex Parte Vermola et al 10577639 - (D) MCMILLIN 103 Ditthavong & Steiner, P.C. NGUYEN, AN V

2457 Ex Parte Peuziat et al 12937127 - (D) BUI 102/103 Hewlett Packard Enterprise TAYLOR, NICHOLAS R

2457 Ex Parte Carrer et al 12380048 - (D) FENICK 103 KRAGULJAC LAW GROUP, LLC / ORACLE TODD, GREGORY G

2475 Ex Parte Cedervall et al 12303211 - (D) JURGOVAN 103 ERICSSON INC. LEE, KEVIN H

2486 Ex Parte Nemethy et al 11535243 - (D) JURGOVAN 103 ADDMG - Harris RAHAMAN, MOHAMMED S

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2697 Ex Parte WESTERMAN 12242772 - (D) PYONIN 103 APPLE c/o MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP LA PATEL, SANJIV D

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2835 Ex Parte Sellers et al 12991483 - (D) KRATZ 102/103 HP Inc. THAKER, NIDHI VIVEK

2875 Ex Parte Jackson 12871258 - (D) TIMM 103 Russell Ng PLLC LEE, NATHANIEL J.

In arguing there is a conflict, Appellant contends that the concept of conflicts between teachings is different from the concept of teaching away. Appeal Br. 6, citing MPEP § 2143.01. But MPEP § 2143.01 reiterates that: "The test for obviousness is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to one of ordinary skill in the art, and all teachings in the prior art must be considered to the extent that they are in analogous arts." see In re Young, 927 F.2d 588, 591 (Fed. Cir. 1991); In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 425 (CCPA 1981). That is the test for all cases of obviousness. One must always weigh the evidence as a whole including any evidence of a teaching away or a conflict. See In re Young at 591.

In the case of Young, there was another reference to Knudsen discrediting the teaching of one of the references relied upon by the examiner, i.e., Carlisle. In Young, Knudsen described tests evaluating the technique of Carlisle and opined that Carlisle's technique would not yield an improvement. Id. at 591. But Appellant in our case does not point to any particular teaching within any of the prior art references with such a discrediting teaching. Silence does not discredit.


Young, In re, 927 F.2d 588, 18 USPQ2d 1089 (Fed. Cir. 1991) 2143.01

Keller, In re, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981) 707.07(f) 2145

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3627 Ex Parte MCCALL et al 12430389 - (D) HORNER 103 INGRASSIA FISHER & LORENZ, P.C. (GM) YU, ARIEL J

3629 Ex Parte Brown 12152774 - (D) WIEDER 103 Christopher P. Maiorana, P.C. OFORI-AWUAH, MAAME

3674 Ex Parte Lord et al 13756688 - (D) BAHR 103 Baker Botts L.L.P. AHUJA, ANURADHA

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3774 Ex Parte Omura 11148841 - (D) SMEGAL 103 FROMMER LAWRENCE & HAUG IWAMAYE, ANDREW MICHAEL

REEXAMINATION

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1621 INVISTA S.à.r.l. Requester and Respondent v. BP Corporation North America Inc. Patent Owner and Appellant Ex Parte 8173834 et al 11/909,117 95002316 - (D) LEBOVITZ 103 BP AMERICA INC. FOR THIRD-PARTY REQUESTER: INVISTA S.a.r.l. CAMPELL, BRUCE R original KATAKAM, SUDHAKAR

Thursday, January 28, 2016

arkley

custom search

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1617 Ex Parte Malec et al 12456567 - (D) MILLS 103 DILWORTH IP, LLC SULLIVAN, DANIELLE D

Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1732 Ex Parte Vermeiren et al 12530868 - (D) TIMM 103 FINA TECHNOLOGY INC MAYES, MELVIN C

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2174 Ex Parte Newman et al 12603457 - (D) HUME 103 BLAKELY SOKOLOFF TAYLOR & ZAFMAN LLP APPLE INC./BSTZ NGUYEN, LE V

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3779 Ex Parte Prisco 12343274 - (D) STEPINA 103 PATENT DEPT - INTUITIVE SURGICAL OPERATIONS KASZTEJNA, MATTHEW JOHN

VACATED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1656 Ex Parte Alfonta et al 13344436 - (D) FREDMAN 102 41.50 103 QUINE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW GROUP, P.C. GEBREYESUS, KAGNEW H

[P]icking and choosing may be entirely proper in the making of a 103, obviousness rejection, where the applicant must be afforded an opportunity to rebut with objective evidence any inference of obviousness which may arise from the similarity of the subject matter which he claims to the prior art, but it has no place in the making of a 102, anticipation rejection. 

In re Arkley, 455 F.2d 586, 587–588 (CCPA 1972).

REEXAMINATION

REVERSED
Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3715 Ex parte ENGLISHTOWN, INC., Patent Owner and Appellant Ex Parte 7,058,354 B2 et al 10/849,457 90013142 - (D) SIU 103 GTC Law Group LLP & Affiliates Third Party Requester: COOLEY LLP SAADAT, CAMERON original ADAMS, CHANDA L

AFFIRMED
2317 Ex parte UBICOMM, LLC Appellant Ex Parte 5,555,376 et al 08/161,968 90013082 - (D) BRANCH 102 FARNEY DANIELS PC THIRD PARTY REQUESTER: MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP CARLSON, JEFFREY D original MEKY, MOUSTAFA M

2317 Ex parte UBICOMM, LLC Appellant Ex Parte 5,611,050 et al 08/474,279 90013084 - (D) BRANCH 102 FARNEY DANIELS PC THIRD PARTY REQUESTER: MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP CARLSON, JEFFREY D original MEKY, MOUSTAFA M

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3714 Ex parte ENGLISHTOWN, INC., Patent Owner and Appellant Ex Parte 6,741,833 B2 et al 09/909,137 90013103 - (D) SIU 103 GTC Law Group LLP & Affiliates Third Party Requester: COOLEY LLP SAADAT, CAMERON original ADAMS, CHANDA L

REHEARING

DENIED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1791 BIODELIVERY SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL, INC. Requester and Cross Appellant v. MONOSOL RX, LLC Patent Owner and Appellant Ex Parte 7666337 et al 10/856,176 95002171 - (R) GUEST 103 Hoffmann & Baron LLP THIRD-PARTY REQUESTER: McCarter & English, LLP DIAMOND, ALAN D original LEE, EDMUND H

Wednesday, January 27, 2016

geisler, malagari

custom search

REEXAMINATION

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1733 RIO TINTO ALCAN INTERNATIONAL LIMITED Requester and Cross-Appellant v. NORSK HYDRO ASA Patent Owner and Appellant Ex Parte 8147625 et al 09/611,009 95002225 - (D) GUEST 112(2) 112(2)/103 WENDEROTH, LIND & PONACK, L.L.P. THIRD-PARTY REQUESTER: BANNER & WITCOFF, LTD. VINCENT, SEAN E original YANG, JIE

In re Geisler, 116 F.3d 1465, 1469 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (“[A] claimed invention is rendered prima facie obvious by the teachings of a prior art reference that discloses a range that touches the range recited in the claim.”) (citing In re Malagari, 499 F.2d 1297, 1303 (CCPA 1974))

Geisler, In re, 116 F.3d 1465, 43 USPQ2d 1362 (Fed. Cir. 1997) 2144.05 2145

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2162 MICROSTRATEGY INC. Requester v. VASUDEVAN SOFTWARE INC. Patent Owner and Appellant Ex Parte 7167864 et al 10/911,368 95000700 - (D) CURCURI 102/103 MEYERTONS, HOOD, KIVLIN, KOWERT & GOETZEL, P.C. THIRD PARTY REQUESTER: FISH & RICHARDSON PC (DC) LEE, CHRISTOPHER E original FLEURANTIN, JEAN B

Monday, January 25, 2016

huang, Geo. M. Martin

custom search

REVERSED
1621 Ex Parte Schiffrin et al 12097847 - (D) GRIMES 103 K&L Gates LLP-Chicago CRUZ, KATHRIEN ANN

1792 Ex Parte Jalalpoor 12310579 - (D) WILSON 102/103 W R GRACE & CO. CONN, PATENT DEPATMENT, LEGAL LEFF, STEVEN N

2467 Ex Parte Nix et al 12559717 - (D) KHAN 103 TERRILE, CANNATTI, CHAMBERS & HOLLAND, LLP DUONG, DUC T

3731 Ex Parte Bergin et al 13249944 - (D) STEPINA 103 MEDTRONIC VASCULAR, INC. HOUSTON, ELIZABETH

3774 Ex Parte Clarke et al 13000594 - (D) JESCHKE 103 SEAGER, TUFTE & WICKHEM, LLP WOZNICKI, JACQUELINE

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
2618 Ex Parte Iourcha et al 11513190 - (D) NAPPI 103 103 VOLPE AND KOENIG, P.C. CRADDOCK, ROBERT J

AFFIRMED
1791 Ex Parte MURRAY et al 13069040 - (D) SMITH 103 Carstens & Cahoon, LLP DEES, NIKKI H

In re Huang, 100 F.3d 135, 140 (Fed. Cir. 1996) (Appellant must offer proof that the asserted commercial success occurred in the relevant market and “that the sales were a direct result of the unique characteristics of the claimed invention—as opposed to other economic and commercial factors unrelated to the quality of the patented subject matter.”); Geo. M. Martin Co. v. Alliance Machine Systems Int’l LLC, 618 F.3d 1294, 1304 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (“The commercial success of a product is relevant to the non-obviousness of a claim only insofar as the success of the product is due to the claimed invention.”)

Huang, In re, 100 F.3d 135, 40 USPQ2d 1685 (Fed. Cir. 1996) 716.03 716.03(b) 1504.01(c) 2145

2425 Ex Parte Clapper 11824223 - (D) BUI 103 TROP, PRUNER & HU, P.C. c/o CPA Global CHEN, CAI Y

2666 Ex Parte Te Vrugt et al 12738659 - (D) McNEILL 102/103 PHILIPS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY & STANDARDS NAKHJAVAN, SHERVIN K

2691 Ex Parte Van Beek et al 12300154 - (D) HAGY 103 PHILIPS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY & STANDARDS LINGARAJU, NAVIN B

2854 Ex Parte Yamada et al 11681902 - (D) BEST 103 AMIN, TUROCY & WATSON, LLP CULLER, JILL E

REEXAMINATION

AFFIRMED
2854 Ex parte COLGATE-PALMOLIVE COMPANY Patent Owner and Appellant Ex Parte 5,690,988 et al 08/594,607 90012824 - (D) LEBOVITZ 102/103 41.50 103 COLGATE-PALMOLIVE COMPANY JONES, DWAYNE C original CULLER, JILL E

Friday, January 22, 2016

mannesmann

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1792 Ex Parte Jalalpoor 12310579 - (D) WILSON 102/103 W R GRACE & CO. CONN, PATENT DEPATMENT, LEGAL LEFF, STEVEN N

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2838 Ex Parte Haj-Maharsi et al 12713766 - (D) NAGUMO 103 ABB INC. TSEHAYE, ZEKRE A

While it is true that the transitional phrase "comprising" leaves the claimed subject matter open to additional elements not recited in the claims, to allow the additional elements connected to the winding structure to include additional voltage source converters would render the "requirement that "a single voltage converter [be] connected to the winding structure'  nugatory. Cf., e.g., Mannesmann DeMag Corp. v. Engineered Metal Products co., Inc., 793 F.2d 1279, 1282 (Fed. Cir. 1986) ("The district court correctly observed that the phrase "consisting of" appears in clause (a), not the preamble of the claim, and thus limits only the element set forth in clause (a). The court correctly declined to read this usage of 'consisting of' as excluding all other elements from the claim as a whole"; emphasis added).

Mannesmann Demag Corp. v. Engineered Metal Products Co., 793 F.2d 1279, 230 USPQ 45 (Fed. Cir. 1986) 2111.03

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3731 Ex Parte Sauer 12766967 - (D) CAPP 102/103 LSI Solutions, Inc HOUSTON, ELIZABETH

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2446 Ex Parte Shuster et al 12830947 - (D) KUMAR 102/103 MEYERTONS, HOOD, KIVLIN, KOWERT & GOETZEL, P.C. NGUYEN, DUSTIN

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2625 Ex Parte Hotelling et al 12118659 - (D) DEJMEK 103 APPLE c/o MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP LA SHAPIRO, LEONID

2662 Ex Parte Paalasmaa et al 11791629 - (D) HAGY 103 Ditthavong & Steiner, P.C. LE, TUAN H

2689 Ex Parte Brenneman et al 12637093 - (D) SZPONDOWSKI 103 International Business Machines Corporation - IT SWARTHOUT, BRENT

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2852 Ex Parte Glenn 10872265 - (D) CRAIG 103 CANTOR COLBURN LLP FULLER, RODNEY EVAN

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3696 Ex Parte McGinnis 12807899 - (D) IPPOLITO 103 MCKELLAR IP LAW, PLLC BERONA, KIMBERLY SUE

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3744 Ex Parte Roberts et al 12435869 - (D) MURPHY 103 AIR PRODUCTS AND CHEMICALS, INC. CRENSHAW, HENRY T

REEXAMINATION

REHEARING

DENIED
Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3711 MLB ADVANCED MEDIA L.P. Requester and Appellant v. BASEBALL QUICK LLC Patent Owner and Respondent Ex Parte 7628716 et al 09/878,860 95002347 - (D) KOHUT 103 TROUTMAN SANDERS LLP Third Party Requester: Foley & Lardner LLP SAADAT, CAMERON original CHAMBERS, MICHAEL S

Thursday, January 21, 2016

miller

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2168 Ex Parte Parikh et al 13072589 - (D) MacDONALD 103 SCHWEGMAN LUNDBERG & WOESSNER/EBAY MOBIN, HASANUL

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2833 Ex Parte Villard et al 12335631 - (D) ROSS 112(2)/102/103 LAW OFFICES OF PETER H. PRIEST, PLLC DUVERNE, JEAN F

In addition, claim limitations reciting intended use merely go to the breadth of the claim and not indefiniteness. In re Miller, 441 F.2d 689, 693 (CCPA 1971). ...

There is little value in any tenet requiring the denial of a claim solely based on the language used to define the claimed subject matter. Id. 692–93 (“If those skilled in the art can tell whether any particular [device] is or is not within the scope of a claim, the claim fulfills its purpose as a definition.”)


Miller, In re, 441 F.2d 689, 169 USPQ 597 (CCPA 1971) 2173.04

2854 Ex Parte Elkinson et al 11999551 - (D) MOHANTY 103 Davidson, Davidson & Kappel, LLC YAN, REN LUO

2854 Ex Parte Tsirline et al 11960136 - (D) KRATZ 103 Zebra/Alston & Bird MARINI, MATTHEW G

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3654 Ex Parte Sattelberger et al 12303105 - (D) WARNER 103 FISH & RICHARDSON P.C. (SD) BUSE, MARK KENNETH

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3775 Ex Parte Ogilvie et al 14170691 - (D) JESCHKE 102/103 Schramm-Personal-ACT BOLES, SAMEH RAAFAT

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3762 Ex Parte Jacobson 11549581 - (D) MELVIN 103 103 St. Jude Medical FLORY, CHRISTOPHER A

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1761 Ex Parte Choczaj et al 12895181 - (D) GARRIS 103 ECOLAB USA INC. DELCOTTO, GREGORY R

1791 Ex Parte Wiwi et al 11897767 - (D) DELMENDO 103 THE PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY DICUS, TAMRA

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2122 Ex Parte Theisen et al 12539743 - (D) CHEN 103 BROOKS KUSHMAN P.C./FGTL GONZALES, VINCENT

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2689 Ex Parte Brenneman et al 12637093 - (D) SZPONDOWSKI 103 International Business Machines Corporation - IT SWARTHOUT, BRENT

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3672 Ex Parte Xu 12633880 - (D) MOHANTY 102/103 Mossman, Kumar and Tyler, PC RUNYAN, RONALD R

3685 Ex Parte Baughman et al 12196695 - (D) MEDLOCK 101 103 ROBERTS MLOTKOWSKI SAFRAN & COLE, P.C. HUANG, TSAN-YU J

REEXAMINATION

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3731 HOLOGIC, INC. Requester, Respondent v. SMITH & NEPHEW, INC. Patent Owner, Appellant Ex Parte 7,226,459 B2 et al 09/983,810 95001933 - (D) SONG 102/103 Smith & Nephew, Inc./Nixon Peabody LLP Third Party Requester: ARNOLD & PORTER LLP WILLIAMS, CATHERINE SERKE original WOO, JULIAN W

REHEARING

DENIED
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2111 CHIMEI INNOLUX DISPLAY CORPORATION, Requester, v. MONDIS TECHNOLOGY LTD., Patent Owner. Ex Parte 7475180 et al 10/160,022 95000480 - (D) SIU 102/103 DECHERT LLP Third Party Requester: Cooley LLP ATTN: Patent Group LEE, CHRISTOPHER E original PHAN, RAYMOND NGAN

Wednesday, January 20, 2016

hotchkiss, boehringer, gulack

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3693 Ex Parte Breitenbach 12197734 - (D) FETTING 103 CANTOR FITZGERALD, L.P. AMELUNXEN, BARBARA J

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3742 Ex Parte Hackel 11240676 - (D) BROWNE 103 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory PAIK, SANG YEOP

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1731 Ex Parte Liu 13532838 - (D) NAGUMO 103/double patenting RANKIN, HILL & CLARK LLP PARVINI, PEGAH

The use of similar materials for similar purposes based on properties disclosed as making the materials useful for those purposes is a classical instance of prima facie obviousness. Hotchkiss v. Greenwood, 52 U.S. 248, 265 (1850) (“the knob of clay was simply the substitution of one [known] material for another [wood].”)

1783 Ex Parte Lim et al 11935126 - (D) DERRICK 103 Fox Rothschild LLP WATKINS III, WILLIAM P

1792 Ex Parte Sugawara et al 12065396 - (D) HEANEY 103 SUGHRUE-265550 LONG, LUANA ZHANG

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2168 Ex Parte Schmidt 12060802 - (D) KAISER 103 BOSWELL IP Law GORTAYO, DANGELINO N

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2427 Ex Parte Casagrande 12135360 - (D) BUI 103 INGRASSIA FISHER & LORENZ, P.C. (EchoStar) ALATA, YASSIN

2434 Ex Parte Overcash et al 11458965 - (D) PYONIN 103 HANLEY, FLIGHT & ZIMMERMAN, LLC BAYOU, YONAS A

2466 Ex Parte Witzel et al 12299346 - (D) STEPHENS 103 ERICSSON INC. ROBERTS, BRIAN S

2487 Ex Parte George et al 12771929 - (D) PINKERTON 103 GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY LI, TRACY Y

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3621 Ex Parte Mehta et al 13356269 - (D) MEDLOCK 103 double patenting FISH & RICHARDSON P.C. WU, RUTAO

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3715 Ex Parte Isenberg 13526384 - (D) SMEGAL 103 41.50 112(2) David H. Chervitz THAI, XUAN MARIAN

It is well established that “[a]n intended use or purpose usually will not limit the scope of the claim because such statements usually do no more than define a context in which the invention operates.” Boehringer Ingelheim Vetmedica, Inc. v. Schering-Plough Corp., 320 F.3d 1339, 1345 (Fed. Cir. 2003).

In re Gulack, 703 F.2d 1381, 1385 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (when descriptive material is not functionally related to the substrate, the descriptive material will not distinguish the invention from the prior art in terms of patentability).


Gulack, In re, 703 F.2d 1381, 217 USPQ 401 (Fed. Cir. 1983) 2112.01

REHEARING

DENIED
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2135 Ex Parte Stansell et al 12234850 - (D) SPONDOWSKI 103 CRGO LAW GOSSAGE, GLENN

Monday, January 18, 2016

bicon, cat tech, king

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3777 Ex Parte Lloyd et al 11300264 - (D) HOSKINS 103 MCANDREWS HELD & MALLOY, LTD BRUTUS, JOEL F

"[C]laims are interpreted with an eye toward giving effect to all terms in the claim." Bicon, Inc. v. Straumann Co., 441 F.3d 945, 950 (Fed. Cir. 2006); see also Cat Tech LLC v. TubeMaster, Inc., 528 F.3d 871, 885 (Fed. Cir. 2008) (refusing to adopt a claim construction which would render a claim limitation meaningless).

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1798 Ex Parte Poulleau 11659123 - (D) GARRIS 103 SUGHRUE MION, PLLC WOODARD, JOYE L

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2185 Ex Parte Biehler et al 12632196 - (D) MCMILLIN 103 SIEMENS CORPORATION DANG, KHANH

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2469 Ex Parte Ali et al 13352985 - (D) MacDONALD 103 Fish & Richardson P.C. (Blackberry) WILLIAMS, JENEE LAUREN

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2628 Ex Parte SONG et al 12537013 - (D) CHEN 103 Artegis Law Group, LLP MISHLER, ROBIN J

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2862 Ex Parte Olmino 12437578 - (D) ULLAGADDI 103 LERNER GREENBERG STEMER LLP ANDERSON, LYNNE D

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3621 Ex Parte Furlong et al 10769117 - (D) FETTING 103 CAMPBELL STEPHENSON LLP WU, RUTAO

The particular labels attached to the codes that are associated are discernable only in the mind of the beholder, and such labels are afforded no patentable weight. King Pharm., Inc. v. Eon Labs, Inc., 616 F.3d 1267, 1279 (Fed. Cir. 2010). (“If we were to adopt Ngai’s position, anyone could continue patenting a product indefinitely provided that they add a new instruction sheet to the product.”).

King Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Eon Labs Inc., 616 F.3d 1267, 95 USPQ2d 1833 (Fed. Cir. 2010) 2111.05 2112.01

3623 Ex Parte Markowitz et al 11752692 - (D) FETTING 103 ARMSTRONG TEASDALE LLP SWARTZ, STEPHEN S

3625 Ex Parte Oiwa 14115488 - (D) FETTING 101 SUGHRUE MION, PLLC GARG, YOGESH C

3683 Ex Parte COOK et al 12917119 - (D) MURPHY 103 Target Brands Inc. GARCIA-GUERRA, DARLENE

3696 Ex Parte Blythe 11965946 - (D) FETTING 112(1)/112(2) 103 HOFFMANN & BARON, LLP BERONA, KIMBERLY SUE

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3753 Ex Parte Baumann et al 11096369 - (D) BROWNE 103 JOHNSON & JOHNSON ROST, ANDREW J

3768 Ex Parte Hall et al 12741831 - (D) PER CURIAM 103 PHILIPS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY & STANDARDS BOR, HELENE CATHERINE

3788 Ex Parte Latvala 12514190 - (D) LANEY 103 Birch, Stewart, Kolasch & Birch, LLP DESAI, KAUSHIKKUMAR A

REHEARING

DENIED
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2135 Ex Parte Stansell et al 12234850 - (D) SZPONDOWSKI 103 CRGO LAW GOSSAGE, GLENN

Friday, January 15, 2016

gurley, ricoh, optivus, fulton

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3742 Ex Parte Rose 12398748 - (D) BAHR 103 Kinney & Lange, P.A. DANG, KET D

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1767 Ex Parte Koestner et al 13275795 - (D) WILSON 103 Brooks Kushman P.C. KOLLIAS, ALEXANDER C

1791 Ex Parte Kiefer et al 11543473 - (D) DELMENDO 112(1)/103/double patenting CANTOR COLBURN LLP DEES, NIKKI H

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2168 Ex Parte Castellanos et al 13070056 - (D) MacDONALD 102 Hewlett Packard Enterprise FAN, SHIOW-JY

2185 Ex Parte Mei et al 13091511 - (D) FISHMAN 112(1)/112(2)/103/double patenting J.B. KRAFT ATTORNEY CLEARY, THOMAS J

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2645 Ex Parte Issa et al 12174935 - (D) HOWARD 103 Concert Technology Corporation GAO, JING

Appellants have not demonstrated that “a person of ordinary skill, upon reading the reference, would be discouraged from following the path set out in the reference, or would be led in a direction divergent from the path that was taken by the applicant.” In re Gurley, 27 F.3d 551, 553 (Fed
Cir. 1994). “A reference may be said to teach away when a person of ordinary skill, upon reading the reference, would be discouraged from following the path set out in the reference, or would be led in a direction divergent from the path that was taken by the applicant.” Ricoh Co., Ltd. v. Quanta Computer, Inc., 550 F.3d 1325, 1332 (Fed. Cir. 2008) (quoting Optivus Tech., Inc. v. Ion Beam Appl'ns. S.A., 469 F.3d 978, 989 (Fed. Cir. 2006)). At best, the prior art here merely discloses an alternative, which is not, by itself, sufficient to demonstrate a teaching away. In re Fulton, 391 F.3d 1195, 1201 (Fed. Cir. 2004).

Gurley, In re, 27 F.3d 551, 31 USPQ2d 1130 (Fed. Cir. 1994) 2123 2145

Fulton, In re, 391 F.3d 1195, 73 USPQ2d 1141 (Fed. Cir. 2004) 2123 2141.02 2143.01 2145

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2822 Ex Parte Ghosh et al 12906739 - (D) HOELTER 103 Hewlett Packard Enterprise FEENEY, BRETT A

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3623 Ex Parte Bangel et al 11427536 - (D) SHAH 103 HOFFMAN WARNICK LLC JARRETT, SCOTT L

3686 Ex Parte Carter et al 12807743 - (D) KIM 103 Jeffrey D. Carter HOLCOMB, MARK

REEXAMINATION

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3731 NuVASIVE, INC. Requester and Appellant v. Patent of ZIMMER SPINE, INC. Patent Owner and Respondent Ex Parte 6,936,050 B2 et al 10/409,805 95000451 - (D) LEBOVITZ 103 MARTIN & FERRARO, LLP FOR THIRD-PARTY REQUESTER: FISH AND RICHARDSON, P.C. JASTRZAB, JEFFREY R original REIP, DAVID OWEN

Thursday, January 14, 2016

keller, wood, sneed, orthopedic, nievelt

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1643 Ex Parte Lawson 11910612 - (D) SMITH 102 MCDONNELL BOEHNEN HULBERT & BERGHOFF LLP BRISTOL, LYNN ANNE

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2443 Ex Parte Sultenfuss et al 12261626 - (D) BARRY 103 LARSON NEWMAN, LLP SHIN, KYUNG H

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3656 Ex Parte Shahana 11740514 - (D) WIEDER 112(2)/103 GLOBAL IP COUNSELORS, LLP YABUT, DANIEL D

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1619 Ex Parte Der-Yang et al 11761698 - (D) PER CURIAM 103 JOHNSON & JOHNSON GREENE, IVAN A

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2435 Ex Parte ORSINI et al 13024791 - (D) PYONIN 103 ROPES & GRAY LLP TRUVAN, LEYNNA THANH

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3686 Ex Parte Niemetz et al 11080251 - (D) MEYERS 103 RATNERPRESTIA NGUYEN, HIEP VAN

"The test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference . . . . Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of those references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art." In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 425 (CCPA 1981) (citing In re Wood, 599 F.2d 1032 (CCPA 1979)); see also In re Sneed, 710 F.2d 1544, 1550 (Fed. Cir. 1983) ("[l]t is not necessary that the inventions of the references be physically combinable to render obvious the invention under review.") (citing Orthopedic Equip. Co., Inc. v. United States, 702 F.2d 1005, 1013 (Fed. Cir. 1983)); and In re Nievelt, 482 F.2d 965, 968 (CCPA 1973) ("Combining the teachings of references does not involve an ability to combine their specific structures.").

Keller, In re, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981) 707.07(f) 2145

Sneed, In re, 710 F.2d 1544, 218 USPQ 385 (Fed. Cir. 1983) 1445 2145

Nievelt, In re, 482 F.2d 965, 179 USPQ 224 (CCPA 1973) 2145