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

Search This Blog

Loading...

Tuesday, March 14, 2017

epstein

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1791 Ex Parte Dwivedi 12256101 - (D) KRATZ Concurring NAGUMO 103 COWAN, LIEBOWITZ & LATMAN, P.C. BADR, HAMID R

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2675 Ex Parte Lou et al 13637452 - (D) PYONIN 103 FAY SHARPE/LUCENT WASHINGTON, JAMARES

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2838 Ex Parte Adragna et al 12820549 - (D) WILSON 103 Slater Matsil, LLP - ST-EP TSEHAYE, ZEKRE A

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3629 Ex Parte Petito et al 10664486 - (D) MEYERS double patenting/103 BASCH & NICKERSON LLP EVANS, KIMBERLY L

3637 Ex Parte Jarvis 12433109 - (D) HOELTER 103 BANNER & WITCOFF, LTD TEFERA, HIWOT E

3643 Ex Parte SMIT et al 12545189 - (D) REIMERS 103 DICKE, BILLIG & CZAJA PARSLEY, DAVID J

3662 Ex Parte Yu et al 12986632 - (D) MOORE 102/103 BROOKS KUSHMAN P.C./FGTL HAN, CHARLES J

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1628 Ex Parte Gallois-Bernos et al 13495049 - (D) LEBOVITZ double patenting/103 JOHNSON & JOHNSON RICCI, CRAIG D

Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1734 Ex Parte Angelides et al 13574807 - (D) KRATZ 103 SHELL OIL COMPANY NASSIRI MOTLAGH, ANITA

1734 Ex Parte Angelides et al 13698377 - (D) KRATZ 103 SHELL OIL COMPANY NASSIRI MOTLAGH, ANITA

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2145 Ex Parte Mahr et al 12637230 - (D) NAPPI 103 SAP SE STITT, ERIK V

2145 Ex Parte McCurdy et al 12237252 - (D) PINKERTON 103 DLA PIPER LLP (US) NGUYEN, TUAN S

2177 Ex Parte Abou-Hallawa et al 12025709 - (D) PER CURIAM 103 LEE & HAYES, PLLC HUYNH, THU V

Further, Appellants argue the Examiner’s collection of screenshots is “insufficient as a matter of law to establish that [the software it is regarding] was known or used by others in this country prior to’ ‘the relevant date of the application.’” App. Br. 5—6 (quoting Hilgraeve, Inc. v. Symantec Corp., Ill F. Supp. 2d 964, 975 (E.D. Mich. 2003)).

We disagree with Appellants. Unlike Hilgraeve which applied the Federal Rules of Evidence in evaluating whether prior art satisfied the “clear and convincing evidence” standard for invalidity in district-court litigation, an Examiner’s rejection is subject to a “preponderance of the evidence” standard and the Federal Rules of Evidence do not apply. In re Epstein, 32 F.3d 1559, 1564 (Fed. Cir. 1994). As noted above, the Examiner found the Microsoft Word 2002 product included features that teach or suggest certain claim limitations, and the Examiner inferred based on the nature of the features and the product’s copyright date that the features are part of the prior art. See Ans. 14; see also Epstein, 32 F.3d at 1567.3

3In his concurring opinion in Epstein, Judge Plager reasoned that it is not the PTO’s responsibility to “know all there is to know about everything” and “[i]t is not unreasonable to expect the applicant to know more about the prior work in the relevant art than the PTO examiner.” Epstein, 32 F.3d at 1570 (Plager, J. and Cowen, Sr.J., concurring). That reasoning seems particularly apt here, as the real party in interest, Microsoft Corporation (App. Br. 3), is also the source of the prior art Microsoft Word 2002 product. Appellants are reminded that “[ejach individual associated with the filing and prosecution of a patent application has a duty of candor and good faith in dealing with the Office, which includes a duty to disclose to the Office all information known to that individual to be material to patentability as defined in this section.” 37 C.F.R. § 1.56 (2012).

Epstein, In re, 32 F.3d 1559, 31 USPQ2d 1817 (Fed. Cir. 1994) 716.07 2128 2133.03(b) 2152.02(d)

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2627 Ex Parte BRIGHT et al 13489010 - (D) PINKERTON 103 3M INNOVATIVE PROPERTIES COMPANY AZONGHA, SARDIS F

2643 Ex Parte Andrews et al 13358403 - (D) STRAUSS 103 TERRILE, CANNATTI, CHAMBERS & HOLLAND, LLP P TAYLOR, NATHAN SCOTT

2689 Ex Parte Protopapas 14045024 - (D) SHAW 103 BROOKS KUSHMAN P.C./FGTL CASILLASHERNANDEZ, OMAR

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3655 Ex Parte Diehl et al 12748332 - (D) OSINSKI 103 Matheson Keys Daffer & Kordzik PLLC FLUHART, STACEY A

3659 Ex Parte McCune et al 13486810 - (D) GREENHUT 103 CARLSON, GASKEY & OLDS/PRATT & WHITNEY KNIGHT, DEREK DOUGLAS

3694 Ex Parte Samandar et al 13164555 - (D) LORIN 101/103 FENWICK & WEST LLP GREGG, MARY M

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3744 Ex Parte Van Dijk 13056161 - (D) OSINSKI 103 SHELL OIL COMPANY KING, BRIAN M

3747 Ex Parte Azevedo et al 13370645 - (D) CAPP 103 DICKINSON WRIGHT PLLC
MCMAHON, MARGUERITE J

3753 Ex Parte Thomas 13172078 - (D) GUIJT 102 Reinhart (Schneider only) ARUNDALE, ROBERT K

No comments :