SEARCH

PTAB.US

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

Friday, December 15, 2017

geneva, orthokinetics, schreiber

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1779 Ex Parte HOLZMANN et al 11869229 - (D) OWENS 112(1)/102/103 Foley & Lardner LLP ANDERSON, DENISE R

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3741 Ex Parte Malecki 13406924 - (D) BROWN 102/103 CARLSON, GASKEY & OLDS/PRATT & WHITNEY IBRONI, STEFAN

3744 Ex Parte CUR et al 13108183 - (D) CALVE Concurring CAPP 103 PRICE HENEVELD LLP WHIRLPOOL CORPORATION TADESSE, MARTHA

3745 Ex Parte Gabeiras et al 13339973 - (D) BROWNE 103 MERCHANT & GOULD P.C. EDGAR, RICHARD A

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 2600 Communications
2658 Ex Parte Qian et al 13399496 - (D) McNEILL 103 MICROSOFT CORPORATION LE, THUYKHANH

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3633 Ex Parte PERVAN et al 13670039 - (D) GREENHUT 102 BUCHANAN, INGERSOLL & ROONEY PC A, PHI DIEU TRAN

Claims 1 and 9 present issues similar to those discussed by our reviewing court in Geneva Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. GlaxoSmithKline PLC, 349 F.3d 1373, 1384 (Fed. Cir. 2003), where a functional interaction with some broad class of unclaimed subject matter is used to define the scope of the subject matter actually claimed.  ...

There is nothing wrong with this style of claiming per se. However, as discussed in Geneva, the scope of the claim becomes highly dependent upon the unclaimed thing, there the bacteria, here the groove, chosen as a basis to analyze the claim. Where that unclaimed subject matter has limits reasonably ascertainable by those skilled in the art, the claim may be quite broad, but not necessarily indefinite. See, e.g., Orthokinetics, Inc. v. Safety Travel Chairs, Inc., 806 F.2d 1565 (Fed. Cir. 1986) (defining the size of the front legs of a travel wheelchair relative to a space between a doorframe and seat of an unclaimed automobile); In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d 1473, 1477-78 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (defining the claimed dispensing top by its interaction with kernels of popped popcorn). 

Geneva Pharms. Inc. v. GlaxoSmithKline PLC, 349 F.3d 1373, 68 USPQ2d 1865 (Fed. Cir. 2003) 804.01, 814

Orthokinetics, Inc. v. Safety Travel Chairs, Inc., 806 F.2d 1565, 1 USPQ2d 1081 (Fed. Cir. 1986) 2173.02 2173.05(b)

Schreiber, In re, 128 F.3d 1473, 44 USPQ2d 1429 (Fed. Cir. 1997) 2111.02 2112 2114

3695 Ex Parte Ferris et al 12628156 - (D) MacDONALD 101 LOWENSTEIN SANDLER LLP / Red Hat OYEBISI, OJO O

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3716 Ex Parte Kadlec et al 14273535 - (D) CAPP 101 STANDLEY LAW GROUP LLP CUFF, MICHAEL A

3753 Ex Parte Jarvis 14269091 - (D) HOFFMANN 102/103 CROSE LAW LLC HOOK, JAMES F