mraz, jockmus, aslanian

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1733 Ex Parte Shindo et al 10570748 - (D) KIMLIN 112(1)/103 HOWSON & HOWSON LLP ROE, JESSEE RANDALL

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2169 Ex Parte Best et al 11627387 - (D) FETTING 103 IBM CORP (YA) C/O YEE & ASSOCIATES PC ZHAO, YU

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2448 Ex Parte Pattan et al 11503279 - (D) KRIVAK 103 THE FARRELL LAW FIRM, P.C. NGUYEN, THANH T

2461 Ex Parte Akyamac et al 11772143 - (D) SMITH 103 WALL & TONG, LLP/ALCATEL-LUCENT USA INC. BEYEN, ZEWDU A

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2666 Ex Parte Hartman et al 11634434 - (D) NEW 102 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 103 Hologic, Inc./Cytyc Corporation LE, BRIAN Q

2668 Ex Parte Astrom et al 10774948 - (D) FRAHM 102/103 FISH & RICHARDSON P.C. (TC) TSAI, TSUNG YIN

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2854 Ex Parte Hoffman et al 11683710 - (D) OWENS 103 HID Global c/o Westman Champlin & Koehler, P.A CULLER, JILL E

2854 Ex Parte Nishimura 12081293 - (D) FRANKLIN 102/103 OLIFF PLC HA, NGUYEN Q

The Examiner relies heavily on drawings.  Drawings and pictures can anticipate claims if they clearly show the structure which is claimed.  In re Mraz, 455 F.2d 1069, 1072 (CCPA 1972). However, the picture must show all the claimed structural features and how they are put together.  Jockmus v. Leviton, 28 F.2d 812, 814 (2d Cir. 1928).  Also, the drawings must be evaluated for what they reasonably disclose and suggest to one of ordinary skill in the art.  In re Aslanian, 590 F.2d 911, 914 (CCPA 1979)

Mraz, In re, 455 F.2d 1069, 173 USPQ 25 (CCPA 1972) 2125
Jockmus v. Leviton, 28 F.2d 812 (2d Cir. 1928) 2121.04 , 2125
Aslanian, In re, 590 F.2d 911, 200 USPQ 500 (CCPA 1979) 2125


2872 Ex Parte Mueller 12125524 - (D) COLAIANNI 103 REISING ETHINGTON P.C. SHAFER, RICKY D

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3721 Ex Parte Bar-Cohen et al 11700575 - (D) BAHR 103 MILSTEIN ZHANG & WU LLC LOPEZ, MICHELLE

3777 Ex Parte Boese et al 11704410 - (D) BAHR 112(2)/103 SIEMENS CORPORATION REMALY, MARK DONALD

AFFIRMED-IN-PART 
Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2846 Ex Parte Herring et al 12149924 - (D) COLAIANNI 102/103 102 Roylance, Abrams, Berdo & Goodman, L.L.P. -Hubbell NGO, HUNG V

2879 Ex Parte Visser et al 12341134 - (D) COLAIANNI 102 103 37 C.F.R.
§ 41.50(b) 103 DINSMORE & SHOHL LLP SANTIAGO, MARICELI

AFFIRMED 
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1765 Ex Parte Nicholas 12485648 - (D) NAGUMO 103 Thompson Hine LLP COONEY, JOHN M

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2127 Ex Parte Armstrong et al 10801195 - (D) HOMERE 103 MARSHALL, GERSTEIN & BORUN LLP NORTON, JENNIFER L

2156 Ex Parte Dettinger et al 11936257 - (D) WHITEHEAD JR. 102 IBM CORPORATION AL HASHEMI, SANA A

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2465 Ex Parte Kaippallimalil 11745881 - (D) DIXON 103 Futurewei Technologies, Inc. c/o Conley Rose, P.C. HSU, ALPUS

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2613 Ex Parte Brown et al 11564010 - (D) STRAUSS, 103 IBM CORPORATION MA, TIZE

2641 Ex Parte Costa et al 10532346 - (D) FRAHM 103 STAAS & HALSEY LLP HOLLIDAY, JAIME MICHELE

2667 Ex Parte Vertoprakhov et al 11484282 - (D) POTHIER 112(2)/103 Jackson Walker LLP HEIDEMANN, JASON E

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2811 Ex Parte Beeson et al 11389201 - (D) KATZ 103 Goldeneye, Inc. HSIEH, HSIN YI

2858 Ex Parte Ungaretti et al 12111803 - (D) GARRIS 103 SEED INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW (EP ORIGINATING) ASSOUAD, PATRICK J

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3725 Ex Parte Schatteman et al 11300562 - (D) HILL 101 103 Ostrolenk Faber LLP GRABOWSKI, KYLEROBERT

REHEARING

DENIED
Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2412 Ex Parte Doshi et al 10673055 - (D) FISHMAN 103 MENDELSOHN, DRUCKER, & DUNLEAVY, P.C. HO, CHUONG T

REEXAMINATION

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1616 NYCOMED US INC. (Requester) v. GLYCOBIOSCIENCES, INC. (Patent Owner and Appellant) Ex Parte Drizen et al 6,723,345 09/986,183 95001687 - (D) LEBOVITZ 112(2) 103 CARELLA, BYRNE, CECCHI, OLSTEIN, BRODY & AGNELLO THIRD PARTY REQUESTER: COVINGTON & BURLING, LLP HUANG, EVELYN MEI original HAGHIGHATIAN, MINA

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2604 Ex parte MOTOROLA MOBILITY LLC Ex Parte 5394140 et al 90010278 - (D) PETTIGREW 103 103 OBLON, SPIVAK, MCCLELLAND MAIER & NEUSTADT, L.L.P. THIRD PARTY REQUESTOR: WILMERHALE/ NEW YORK TARAE, CATHERINE MICHELLE original HORABIK, MICHAEL

aslanian, baum, caveney

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1758 Ex Parte Peterman et al 10711327 - (D) HASTINGS 102 NUPAT, LLC DAM, DUSTIN Q

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3629 Ex Parte Rothermel et al 11027578 - (D) MEDLOCK 102 FOUNTAINHEAD LAW GROUP, PC ABDELSALAM, FATHI K

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3717 Ex Parte Kaneko 11167222 - (D) GROSSMAN 103 NIXON & VANDERHYE, P.C. LIM, SENG HENG

A drawing or illustration “can be cited against the claims of a utility patent application even though the feature shown in the drawing was unintended or unexplained.” In re Aslanian, 590 F.2d 911, 914 (CCPA 1979). However, like all references, a drawing or illustration is evaluated and applied on the basis of what it reasonably discloses and suggests to a person having ordinary skill in the relevant technology. In re Baum, 374 F.2d 1004, 1009 (CCPA 1967). An Examiner’s factual finding regarding what any reference discloses must be supported by a preponderance of the evidence. In re Caveney, 761 F.2d 671, 674 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (“preponderance of the evidence is the standard that must be met by the PTO in making rejections”). A preponderance of the evidence is evidence that is more convincing than the opposing evidence. See, C. McCormick, McCormick on Evidence § 339 (2d ed. 1972) ("[E]vidence preponderates when it is more convincing to the trier than the opposing evidence." McCormick, supra, at 793).

Aslanian, In re, 590 F.2d 911, 200 USPQ 500 (CCPA 1979) 2125

Caveney, In re, 761 F.2d 671, 226 USPQ 1 (Fed. Cir. 1985) 2133.03(b)

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3718 Ex Parte Smith 11207194 - (D) HILL 103 103 NIXON & VANDERHYE, P.C. PIERCE, DAMON JOSEPH

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1762 Ex Parte Gosselin 11478372 - (D) McKELVEY 103 Ober, Kaler, Grimes & Shriver NILAND, PATRICK DENNIS

1785 Ex Parte Haese et al 11312162 - (D) OBERMANN 103 NOVAK DRUCE CONNOLLY BOVE + QUIGG LLP HIGGINS, GERARD T

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3723 Ex Parte Grez et al 11022910 - (D) HILL 103 Philips Electronics KARLS, SHAY LYNN

FEDERAL CIRCUIT

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3695 IN RE ANTHONY JEREMIAH BAYNE 2012-1640 11/871,I12 PER CURIAM 103 ANTHONY JEREMIAH BAYNE DASS, HARISH T

hewlett-packard, aslanian

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1657 Ex Parte Pillar et al 10792937 - (D) GRIMES 103 SHUMAKER & SIEFFERT, P. A. SRIVASTAVA, KAILASH C

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2156 Ex Parte Wenn et al 11695418 - (D) CLEMENTS 103 GIBB & RILEY, LLC COBY, FRANTZ

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3628 Ex Parte Laicher et al 10894652 - (D) MEDLOCK 103 SAP AG c/o BUCKLEY, MASCHOFF & TALWALKAR LLC ALLEN, AKIBA KANELLE

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3731 Ex Parte Kim et al 11400023 - (D) GRIMES 102/103 Becton, Dickinson and Company (The Webb Firm) SZPIRA, JULIE ANN

3738 Ex Parte McKinsey et al 12195762 - (D) FREDMAN 112(1)/102/103 BRINKS HOFER GILSON & LIONE/CHICAGO/COOK SCHALL, MATTHEW WAYNE

3762 Ex Parte Chen et al 10922133 - (D) FREDMAN 103 Landrum Intellectual Property STOKLOSA, JOSEPH A

3766 Ex Parte van Oort et al 11669345 - (D) McCOLLUM 102/103 Medtronic, Inc. (CRDM) STICE, PAULA J

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3629 Ex Parte Locker et al 11403752 - (D) MEDLOCK 112(2)/103 103 ROGITZ & ASSOCIATES ABDELSALAM, FATHI K

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2167 Ex Parte Lawande et al 10936469 - (D) FISHMAN 103 Vista IP Law Group, LLP (Oracle) PHAM, MICHAEL

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2442 Ex Parte Brady et al 11441998 - (D) PER CURIAM 112(1)/103 KELLEY DRYE & WARREN LLP MACILWINEN, JOHN MOORE JAIN

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2884 Ex Parte Sanpitak 11691568 - (D) JEFFERY 103 SIEMENS CORPORATION LEE, SHUN K

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3626 Ex Parte Rucker 10704400 - (D) LORIN 103 Alexander J. Burke COUPE, ANITA YVONNE

But “apparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does.” Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb, Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1468 (Fed. Cir. 1990).

Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 15 USPQ2d 1525 (Fed. Cir. 1990) 2114

3655 Ex Parte LIGHT et al 11277533 - (D) GREENHUT 102/103 BORGWARNER INC. KNIGHT, DEREK DOUGLAS

The drawings in a utility patent can be used for all they disclose, even if the features shown are unintended or unexplained in the specification. See In re Aslanian, 590 F.2d 911, 914 (CAFC 1979).

Aslanian, In re, 590 F.2d 911, 200 USPQ 500 (CCPA 1979) 2125

3695 Ex Parte Perez et al 11175911 - (D) MEDLOCK 103 OBLON, SPIVAK, MCCLELLAND MAIER & NEUSTADT, L.L.P. POLLOCK, GREGORY A  

REEXAMINATION  

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3627 Ex parte SUBSEA SERVICES INTERNATIONAL, INC. Patent Owner and Appellant 90010812 6,402,201 09/517,383 HOELTER 112(1)/103 Bracewell & Giuliani LLP LEWIS, AARON J original LUU, TUYET PHUONG PHAM

FEDERAL CIRCUIT

VACATED
Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2862 BARON SERVICES, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MEDIA WEATHER INNOVATIONS LLC, Defendant-Appellee 2012-1285, -1443 6,490,525 09/928,391 PROST dissenting REYNA summary judgment non-infringement Lanier Ford Shaver & Payne, PC Jones & Keller, P.C. MCELHENY JR, DONALD E

aslanian, merck, keller, klosak, mcclain, fout, siebentritt

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1729 Ex Parte Young et al 11853855 - (D) HASTINGS 103 37 C.F.R. 41.50(b) 102 FRASER CLEMENS MARTIN & MILLER LLC DUDLEY, ARCHER DAVIS

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1755 Ex Parte Weiss et al 12288560 - (D) HANLON 103 103 M.P. Williams PILLAY, DEVINA

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3643 Ex Parte Muthiah et al 10873501 - (D) HORNER 103 103 GERALD K. WHITE & ASSOCIATES, P.C. NGUYEN, SON T

See also In re Aslanian, 590 F.2d 911, 914 (CCPA 1979) (“a drawing in a utility patent can be cited against the claims of a utility patent application even though the feature shown in the drawing was unintended or unexplained in the specification of the reference patent.”) (citations omitted).

Aslanian, In re, 590 F.2d 911, 200 USPQ 500 (CCPA 1979) 2125

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design

3774 Ex Parte Ryan et al 12059495 - (D) SPAHN 102/103 103 Medtronic, Inc. (CRDM) MATTHEWS, WILLIAM H

We are not persuaded by Appellants’ arguments because one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on a combination of references. See In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 1097 (Fed. Cir. 1986); In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 425 (CCPA 1981).

Merck & Co., Inc., In re, 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986) 707.07(f), 716.02,  2143.02,  2144.08,  2144.09, 2145

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

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1729 Ex Parte Skinlo 10665687 - (D) HASTINGS 103 QUALLION LLC RUDDOCK, ULA CORINNA

1762 Ex Parte Stueven et al 12438835 - (D) McKELVEY 103 MARSHALL, GERSTEIN & BORUN LLP ENG, ELIZABETH

In order to rely on an alleged expected result (or a "substantial effect"), applicant must show that it in fact gets that result. In re Klosak, 455 F.2d 1077, 1080 (CCPA 1972) (inventor must show that the results the inventor says the inventor gets with the invention are actually obtained with the invention). See also McClain v. Ortmayer, 141 U.S. 419, 429 (1891) (conclusive evidence needed to establish new function).

1763 Ex Parte Okada et al 12531655 - (D) McKELVEY 102/103 Styron/BHGL USELDING, JOHN E

1771 Ex Parte Nguyen et al 12019276 - (D) NAGUMO 102/103 Mossman, Kumar and Tyler, PC STEIN, MICHELLE

1774 Ex Parte Zetlmeisl et al 11601401 - (D) METZ 103 Mossman, Kumar and Tyler, PC ROBINSON, RENEE E

1784 Ex Parte Munro et al 11758765 - (D) NAGUMO 103 PPG INDUSTRIES INC MCNEIL, JENNIFER C

1785 Ex Parte Hood 11546067 - (D) OBERMANN 103 INTERNATIONAL SPECIALTY PRODUCTS SHEWAREGED, BETELHEM

Where two known alternatives are interchangeable for a desired function, an express suggestion to substitute one for the other is not needed to render a substitution obvious. In re Fout, 675 F.2d 297, 301 (CCPA 1982); In re Siebentritt, 372 F.2d 566, 568 (CCPA 1967).

Fout, In re, 675 F.2d 297, 213 USPQ 532 (CCPA 1982) 2129, 2143.01, 2144.06

1791 Ex Parte Ikuina et al 11498154 - (D) GAUDETTE 103 BUCHANAN, INGERSOLL & ROONEY PC PADEN, CAROLYN A

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2167 Ex Parte Lim 11615637 - (D) DANG 103 AKA CHAN LLP REYES, MARIELA D

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2421 Ex Parte Lee 11353584 - (D) MANTIS MERCADER 103 THE DIRECTV GROUP, INC. PARRY, CHRISTOPHER L

2477 Ex Parte Sadot 11238924 - (D) EVANS 102/103 Cochran Freund & Young/ AVAYA, Inc. ZHOU, YONG

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2829 Ex Parte SONG et al 11564760 - (D) WHITEHEAD, JR. 103 VOLENTINE & WHITT PLLC CHI, SUBERR L

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3777 Ex Parte McGee 11117022 - (D) WALSH 112(1)/103 SEAGER, TUFTE & WICKHEM, LLC LUONG, PETER
 
REEXAMINATION  

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU)
2863 GARRY IAN HOLLOWAY Requester and Appellant v. GEMOLOGICAL INSTITUTE OF AMERICA, INC. Patent Owner and Respondent 95001542 7,571,060 10/952,386 SIU 102/103 DLA PIPER US LLP NASSER, ROBERT L original LE, JOHN H