SEARCH

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

Showing posts with label continental can. Show all posts
Showing posts with label continental can. Show all posts

Friday, September 18, 2020

hansgirg, continental can





custom search


REVERSED 
1711 KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS N.V. 14760595 - (D) HEANEY 103 PHILIPS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY & STANDARDS AYALEW, TINSAE B

1716 Applied Materials, Inc. 14610489 - (D) RANGE 103 PATTERSON & SHERIDAN, LLP - - APPLIED MATERIALS CHEN, KEATH T

1727 Sang-Kyu CHOI et al. 12980713 - (D) COLAIANNI 103 LGCHEM Lerner, David, Littenberg, Krumholz & Mentlik, LLP MCDERMOTT, HELEN M

1729 Medtronic, Inc. 14317092 - (D) SNAY 103 Medtronic, Inc. (CVG) GATEWOOD, DANIEL S

1745 Rubin, Alexander M. et al. 12711401 - (D) DELMENDO 103 DUKE W. YEE YEE & ASSOCIATES, P.C. TUCKER, PHILIP C

1771 SUNCOKE TECHNOLOGY AND DEVELOPMENT LLC. 13730796 - (D) RANGE 103 PERKINS COIE LLP - SEA General PO, MING CHEUNG

1781 ARMSTRONG WORLD INDUSTRIES, INC. 14678163 - (D) COLAIANNI 103 Budzyn IP Law, LLC Christina Geerlof SAWDON, ALICIA JANE

1782 William J. Michie et al. 14363092 - (D) HEANEY 102/103 The Dow Chemical Company/Dinsmore & Shohl LLP HOCK, ELLEN SUZANNE

2468 Zhijun Cai et al. 12341948 - (D) BEAMER 102 CONLEY ROSE, P.C. PHUNG, LUAT

2669 Len Cech 14099260 - (D) SHAW 103 GORDON & REES LLP LU, ZHIYU

2837 TRENCH AUSTRIA GMBH 14771571 - (D) COLAIANNI 103 COZEN O'CONNOR BARNES, MALCOLM

2845 GETAC TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION 14800719 - (D) BAIN 102/103 QUINTERO LAW OFFICE, PC NGUYEN, LINH V

3621 Simon Phillips et al. 11870144 - (D) DIXON 103 Mastercard International Incorporated c/o Buckley, Maschoff & Talwalkar LLC MANDEL, MONICA A

3626 Vijay K. Pillai 13530185 - (D) ENGLE 101 Kraguljac Law Group/Oracle LULTSCHIK, WILLIAM G

3665 Bell Helicopter Textron Inc. 15167886 - (D) SCHOPFER 103 Lightfoot & Alford PLLC (BHTI) GORDON, MATHEW FRANKLIN

3693 Integral Development Inc. 14214035 - (D) BARRY 101 Artegis Law Group, LLP John Carey MAGUIRE, LINDSAY M

3693 INTUIT INC. 13781571 - (D) BARRY 103 DLA PIPER LLP US - Intuit BORLINGHAUS, JASON M

3735 George L. Diaz-Santiago 14041700 - (D) MURPHY 103 EUGENIO J. TORRES PERREAULT, ANDREW D

3792 Gary W. King et al. 14454427 - (D) LORIN 103 SHUMAKER & SIEFFERT , P.A ALTER MORSCHAUSE, ALYSSA MARGO

“Inherency, however, may not be established by probabilities or possibilities.  The mere fact that a certain thing may result from a given set of circumstances is not sufficient.”  Hansgirg v. Kemmer, 102 F.2d 212, 214 (CCPA 1939), quoted in Continental Can Co. USA v. Monsanto Co., 948 F.2d 1264, 1269 (Fed. Cir. 1991).  For example, the Examiner does not direct us to any evidence that Whitehurst’s sensing devices for sensing neural activity are configured to detect an efferent response of a patient.

Continental Can Co. v. Monsanto Co., 948 F.2d 1264, 20 USPQ2d 1746 (Fed. Cir. 1991) 2131.01

AFFIRMED-IN-PART 
1612 Kristina King 13721744 - (D) GRIMES 112(1) 112(1)/OTDP MILLEN, WHITE, ZELANO & BRANIGAN, P.C. WEBB, WALTER E

2872 CARL ZEISS SMT GMBH 13790443 - (D) HUME 103 102 FISH & RICHARDSON P.C. (BO) ALLEN, STEPHONE B

3621 Brian F. Roberts et al. 13195820 - (D) ENGLE 101/103 103 VERIZON SNIDER, SCOTT

AFFIRMED 
1612 Maloney, Venda Porter. et al. 15287242 - (D) TOWNSEND 103 COLGATE-PALMOLIVE COMPANY WEBB, WALTER E

1632 LESCH, Hanna P. et al. 15306830 - (D) VALEK 112(2) 102 Pharmaceutical Patent Attorneys, LLC MONTANARI, DAVID A

1741 BASF SE 14806102 - (D) KENNEDY 103 OBLON, MCCLELLAND, MAIER & NEUSTADT, L.L.P. SNELTING, ERIN LYNN

1788 SK GLOBAL CHEMICAL CO., LTD. et al. 15011731 - (D) SQUIRE 103 The PL Law Group, PLLC MANGOHIG, THOMAS A

1795 Roeger-Goepfert, Cornelia et al. 13257716 - (D) KENNEDY 103 OBLON, MCCLELLAND, MAIER & NEUSTADT, L.L.P. WITTENBERG, STEFANIE S

2123 Chen, Gao et al. 12362209 - (D) JEFFERY 101 Potomac Law Group, PLLC (Oracle International) RIFKIN, BEN M

2175 Immersion Corporation 14198884 - (D) BARRY 103 Kilpatrick Townsend and Stockton/Immersion VU, THANH T

2459 Lyudmil Vladimirov. Antonov et al. 13495950 - (D) CHEN 103 FOUNTAINHEAD LAW GROUP, PC SHAH, MEHULKUMAR J

2492 LOCKHEED MARTIN CORPORATION 14959677 - (D) POTHIER 112(2) 112(2)/103 Roberts Calderon Safran & Cole, P.C. CHAO, MICHAEL W

2616 Karlsruher Institut fur Technologie 14324301 - (D) HUME 103 Leydig, Voit & Mayer, Ltd. (Frankfurt office) MAZUMDER, TAPAS

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2831 Hamilton Sundstrand Corporation 15176232 - (D) SQUIRE 103 CARLSON, GASKEY & OLDS, P.C. NGUYEN, VIET P

2834 Mitsubishi Electric Corporation 14616829 - (D) POTHIER 103 SUGHRUE MION, PLLC MULLINS, BURTON S

2862 Gang Ji et al. 13976093 - (D) McMANUS 101 103 41.50 103 Jordan IP Law, LLC FAIRBANKS, BRENT ALAN

3612 Barry Rimler et al. 11251587 - (D) KORNICZKY 103 LANDO & ANASTASI, LLP BLANKENSHIP, GREGORY A

3621 Cox Media Group Digital Development, Inc. 14863502 - (D) BUSCH 112(1)/101 ELCHANTI, TAREK ELCHANTI, TAREK

3621 TRANS UNION LLC 13841022 - (D) BAYAT 103 101 NEAL, GERBER, & EISENBERG MPAMUGO, CHINYERE

3623 AKTANA, INC. 13889283 - (D) ENGLE 101 Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP MARCUS, LELAND R

3623 Reza B'Far et al. 13932286 - (D) JURGOVAN 101/103 Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP/Oracle BOYCE, ANDRE D

3624 Paul D'Arcy et al. 13690115 - (D) MURPHY 103 STEVENS & SHOWALTER, LLP Box AVAYA Inc. DIVELBISS, MATTHEW H

3626 KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS N.V. 14056152 - (D) TOWNSEND 101 PHILIPS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY & STANDARDS REYES, REGINALD R

3629 Facebook, Inc. 13677062 - (D) BENNETT 101 Facebook/Fenwick PRATT, EHRIN LARMONT

3681 Rick A. Hamilton et al. 12189225 - (D) WIEDER 101 Roberts Calderon Safran & Cole, P.C. SORKOWITZ, DANIEL M

3681 Roytman, Anatoly et al. 13264480 - (D) JURGOVAN 101 MANNAVA & KANG, P.C. LI, SUN M

3683 BANSAL, SHEFALI et al. 14274343 - (D) BARRY OTDP LAW OFFICE OF JIM BOICE LOFTIS, JOHNNA RONEE

3684 eBay Inc. 14585107 - (D) BUSCH 101 SCHWEGMAN LUNDBERG & WOESSNER/EBAY MILLER, BRITTNEY N

3686 HAMILTON, RYAN et al. 14048377 - (D) DEJMEK 101 SHOOK, HARDY & BACON L.L.P. (CERNER CORPORATION) AUGUSTINE, VICTORIA PEARL

3686 Neal Patterson et al. 14048349 - (D) DEJMEK 112(2) 101 HOOK, HARDY & BACON L.L.P. (CERNER CORPORATION) AUGUSTINE, VICTORIA PEARL

3693 MasterCard International Incorporated 14541390 - (D) JURGOVAN 101 DANIEL M. FITZGERALD (21652) ARMSTRONG TEASDALE LLP KWONG, CHO YIU

3694 Grieder, Ralph et al. 12064464 - (D) MOHANTY 103 101 OBLON, MCCLELLAND, MAIER & NEUSTADT, L.L.P. CRANFORD, MICHAEL D

3745 UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION 15038594 - (D) OSINSKI 103 CARLSON, GASKEY & OLDS/PRATT & WHITNEY PETERS, BRIAN O

3774 Novartis AG 14976070 - (D) STEPINA 103 ALCON INC. c/o Alcon Research LLC LOPEZ, LESLIE ANN

IPLA Valton, Julien et al. 14235759 - (D) JENKS 103 ARRIGO, LEE, GUTTMAN & MOUTA-BELLUM LLP WEILER, KAREN S


Wednesday, January 7, 2015

continental can, oelrich

custom search

REVERSED 
Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3725 Ex Parte Solomon et al 12648325 - (D) BAYAT 102/103 FLSMIDTH FRANCIS, FAYE

3752 Ex Parte Babaev 11610402 - (D) HOELTER 102/103 Bacoustics, LLC BOECKMANN, JASON J

In order to establish inherency, the extrinsic evidence “must make clear that the missing descriptive matter is necessarily present in the thing described in the reference.” Continental Can Co. v. Monsanto Co., 948 F.2d 1264, 1268 (Fed. Cir. 1991). “Inherency, however, may not be established by probabilities or possibilities. The mere fact that a certain thing may result from a given set of circumstances is not sufficient.” Id. at 1269 (quoting In re Oelrich, 666 F.2d 578, 581 (C.C.P.A. 1981)) (emphasis added).

Continental Can Co. v. Monsanto Co., 948 F.2d 1264, 20 USPQ2d 1746 (Fed. Cir. 1991) 2131.01

Oelrich, In re, 666 F.2d 578, 212 USPQ 323 (CCPA 1981) 2112

AFFIRMED 
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1773 Ex Parte Lau et al 12343149 - (D) NAGUMO 103 MCDONNELL BOEHNEN HULBERT & BERGHOFF LLP WOODARD, JOYE L

Wednesday, November 19, 2014

schreiber, kloster, baxter travenol, continental can, therasense

custom search

REVERSED 
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2184 Ex Parte MacInnis et al 10763087 - (D) SHAW 103 Foley & Lardner LLP/ Broadcom Corporation HASSAN, AURANGZEB

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2439 Ex Parte Munsell et al 11828601 - (D) MacDONALD 102/103 THE DIRECTV GROUP, INC. TOLENTINO, RODERICK

2453 Ex Parte Miller 11865981 - (D) MOORE 102/103 IBM (ROC-BKLS) c/o Biggers Kennedy Lenart Spraggins LLP GEORGANDELLIS, ANDREW C

“To anticipate a claim, a prior art reference must disclose every limitation of the claimed invention, either explicitly or inherently.” In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d 1473, 1477 (Fed. Cir. 1997). “[A]bsence from the reference of any claimed element negates anticipation.” Kloster Speedsteel AB v. Crucible, Inc., 793 F.2d 1565, 1571 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Because the Examiner’s rejection is based on anticipation under 35 U.S.C. § 102—and not obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103—the Examiner may only use extrinsic evidence for the limited purpose of explaining what is inherent in the MPI-2 reference. See, e.g., In re Baxter Travenol Labs., 952 F.2d 388, 390 (Fed. Cir. 1991) (“Extrinsic evidence may be considered when it is used to explain, but not to expand, the meaning of a reference [relied upon to show anticipation].”) (emphasis added). ...

Where a “reference is silent about the asserted inherent characteristic, such gap in the reference may be filled with recourse to extrinsic evidence,” but “such evidence must make clear that the missing descriptive matter is necessarily present in the thing described in the reference, and that it would be so recognized by persons of ordinary skill . . . .” Continental Can Co. USA, Inc. v. Monsanto Co., 948 F.2d 1264, 1268 (Fed. Cir. 1991) (citations omitted, emphasis added).


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

Baxter Travenol Labs., In re, 952 F.2d 388, 21 USPQ2d 1281 (Fed. Cir. 1991) 2131.01 2145

Continental Can Co. v. Monsanto Co., 948 F.2d 1264, 20 USPQ2d 1746 (Fed. Cir. 1991) 2131.01

2476 Ex Parte Elston et al 11929995 - (D) COURTENAY 102/103 WHIRLPOOL CORPORATION - MD 3601 SLOMS, NICHOLAS

“Inherency, however, may not be established by probabilities or possibilities. The mere fact that a certain thing may result from a given set of circumstances is not sufficient.” Therasense, Inc. v. Becton, Dickinson & Co., 593 F.3d 1325, 1332 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (citing Cont'l Can Co. USA, Inc. v. Monsanto Co., 948 F.2d 1264, 1269 (Fed. Cir. 1991)).

Continental Can Co. v. Monsanto Co., 948 F.2d 1264, 20 USPQ2d 1746 (Fed. Cir. 1991) 2131.01

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3769 Ex Parte Tice 11172106 - (D) WIEKER 103 HONEYWELL/HUSCH SORIANO, BOBBY GILES

3788 Ex Parte Roberts 11601292 - (D) CALVE 103 Technology & Innovation Law Group, PC GRANO, ERNESTO ARTURIO

AFFIRMED-IN-PART 
Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2842 Ex Parte Gomm et al 11367914 - (D) DELMENDO 103 103 TRASK BRITT, P.C./ MICRON TECHNOLOGY O TOOLE, COLLEEN J

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3746 Ex Parte Garzaniti et al 12178759 - (D) HOELTER 103 102/103 TERUMO CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS CORPORATION KRAMER, DEVON C

AFFIRMED 
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1644 Ex Parte Watanabe et al 10568761 - (D) ADAMS 102/103 SUGHRUE MION, PLLC HADDAD, MAHER M

Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1782 Ex Parte Harris 12481670 - (D) HASTINGS 103 DICKINSON WRIGHT PLLC KASHNIKOW, ERIK

1785 Ex Parte Tran et al 11103827 - (D) PER CURIAM 103 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY HIGGINS, GERARD T

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2618 Ex Parte Andreasson 12167761 - (D) McCARTNEY 103 MYERS BIGEL SIBLEY & SAJOVEC, P.A. AMIN, JWALANT B

2689 Ex Parte Shaffer et al 11460456 - (D) DIXON 103 BROOKS KUSHMAN P.C./FGTL JIANG, YONG HANG

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2864 Ex Parte Tomlinson et al 12472650 - (D) HASTINGS 103 GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY HWANG, TIMOTHY

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3654 Ex Parte Clute et al 11713945 - (D) KINDER 112(2) 103 BGL/Autoliv ASP MANSEN, MICHAEL R

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3723 Ex Parte Storkel et al 10535436 - (D) GUIJT 102 THE PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY CHIN, RANDALL E

3738 Ex Parte Dugan et al 11325973 - (D) ADAMS 103 SQUIRE PATTON BOGGS (US) LLP STEWART, JASON-DENNIS NEILKEN

3745 Ex Parte Brown et al 12122869 - (D) STEPINA 102/103 CARLSON, GASKEY & OLDS/PRATT & WHITNEY EDGAR, RICHARD A

Tuesday, August 19, 2014

Phillips, bristol-myers2, continental can, kansas jack, goodyear dental

custom search

REVERSED 
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2185 Ex Parte Gaither et al 11554672 - (D) SMITH 103 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY LI, ZHUO H

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2822 Ex Parte Todd 11626730 - (D) WORTH 103 Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear LLP TRINH, MICHAEL MANH

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3677 Ex Parte Kelly 10737087 - (D) HOELTER 112(1)/112(2) CANTOR COLBURN LLP LAVINDER, JACK W

Appellant disagrees and references Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303, 1313 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (en banc) for stating “the ordinary and customary meaning of a claim term is the meaning that the term would have to a person of ordinary skill in the art in question at the time of the invention, i.e., as of the effective filing date of the patent application.” App. Br. 21 (additional citations omitted); see also Reply Br. 2. “Accordingly, the Examiner's allegation that the meaning could change over time is irrelevant, as the meaning ‘at the time of invention’ determines plain meaning.” App. Br. 21; see also Reply Br. 3.

Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303, 75 USPQ2d 1321 (Fed. Cir. 2005) 2111 2111.01 2143.01 2258

AFFIRMED 
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2121 Ex Parte Bugir et al 11305873 - (D) SAADAT 103 William E. Curry PADMANABHAN, KAVITA

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2438 Ex Parte Scrimsher et al 11497156 - (D) FRAHM 103 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY PLECHA, THADDEUS J

2473 Ex Parte Meier et al 11600492 - (D) WINSOR 103 CHRISTOPHER & WEISBERG, P.A. HUQ, OBAIDUL

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2649 Ex Parte Rooyen 11010486 - (D) JEFFERY 103 STERNE, KESSLER, GOLDSTEIN & FOX P.L.L.C. CHEN, JUNPENG

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2859 Ex Parte Jiang et al 12182531 - (D) GARRIS 103 3M INNOVATIVE PROPERTIES COMPANY BERHANU, SAMUEL

REEXAMINATION

REVERSED
Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3636 Ex parte Artsana USA, Inc. Patent Owner and Appellant Ex Parte 8056975 et al 12/573,484 90009987 - (D) GREENHUT 103 VOLPE AND KOENIG, P.C. Third Party Requester: Law Office of John W. Harbst ENGLISH, PETER C original NELSON JR, MILTON

“[U]nhelpful evidence [does not] diminish[] the strength of the more persuasive forms of evidence.” Bristol-Myers Squibb Company V. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., 13-1306, 18 (Fed. Cir. Jun. 12, 2014). The burden of showing commercial success attributable to the features of the claim does not impose a burden to demonstrate that no other conceivable factors contributed to that success. App. Br. 31-36; contra Ans. 8. “It is not necessary that [] the patented invention be solely responsible for the commercial success, in order for this factor to be given weight appropriate to the evidence, along with other pertinent factors.” Continental Can Co. USA v. Monsanto Co., 948 F.2d 1264, 1273 (Fed.Cir. 1991).

Continental Can Co. v. Monsanto Co., 948 F.2d 1264, 20 USPQ2d 1746 (Fed. Cir. 1991) 2131.01

We are unaware of any requirement that the invention be the only successful product in its market niche or the most successful. App. Br. 38 (citing Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Teva Pharms. USA, Inc., 923 F. Supp. 2d 602,679 (D. Del. 2013) aff’d at Bristol-Myers Squibb Company V. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc ., supra (Fed. Cir. Jun. 12, 2014)(“ We agree with the factual findings on secondary considerations and find no clear error”). Evidence of growth in market share, like evidence of total market share, is relevant to the commercial success inquiry. See e.g., Kansas Jack, Inc. v. Kuhn, 719 F. 2d 1144, 1151 (Fed. Cir. 1983). A growing market share demonstrates that Appellant was “displac[ing] other devices which had previously been employed for analogous uses.” See Smith v. Goodyear Dental Vulcanite Co., 93 US 486, 495-6 (1877).

AFFIRMED 
Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2821 SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. Requester and Respondent v. FRACTUS, S.A. Patent Owner and Appellant Ex Parte 7528782 et al 11/780,932 95001455 - (D) MOORE 102(e)/103 EDELL, SHAPIRO & FINNAN, LLC Third Party Requester: Novak Druce & Quigg, LLP Morrison & Foerster LLP MENEFEE, JAMES A original PHAN, THO GIA

Thursday, July 31, 2014

therasense, schering, continental can, chester bancorp

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2156 Ex Parte Curtis et al 12050233 - (D) CHUNG 103 LOTUS AND RATIONAL SOFTWARE David A. Dagg, Esq. OBISESAN, AUGUSTINE KUNLE

2156 Ex Parte Carter et al 12125485 - (D) FRAHM 102 IBM RALEIGH IPLAW (DG) C/O DELIZIO GILLIAM, PLLC LIAO, JASON G

2161 Ex Parte Hamada et al 10543565 - (D) HUME 102 FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, GARRETT & DUNNER LLP ACOB, AJITH

Anticipation of a claim under 35 U.S.C. § 102 occurs when each claimed element and the claimed arrangement or combination of those elements is disclosed, inherently or expressly, by a single prior art reference. Therasense, Inc. v. Becton, Dickinson & Co., 593 F.3d 1325, 1332 (Fed. Cir. 2010). A reference inherently discloses an element of a claim “if that missing characteristic is necessarily present, or inherent, in the single anticipating reference.” Schering Corp. v. Geneva Pharms., 339 F.3d 1373,
1377 (Fed. Cir. 2003) (citation omitted) (emphasis added). “Inherency, however, may not be established by probabilities or possibilities. The mere fact that a certain thing may result from a given set of circumstances is not sufficient.” Therasense, 593 F.3d at 1332 (citing Cont'l Can Co. USA, Inc. v. Monsanto Co., 948 F.2d 1264,1269 (Fed. Cir. 1991)).

Schering Corp. v. Geneva Pharm. Inc., 339 F.3d 1373, 67 USPQ2d 1664 (Fed. Cir. 2003) 2112 2152.02(b)

Continental Can Co. v. Monsanto Co., 948 F.2d 1264, 20 USPQ2d 1746 (Fed. Cir. 1991) 2131.01

2169 Ex Parte Kar et al 11675392 - (D) BRANCH 112(1)/102(e) RYAN, MASON & LEWIS, LLP ROBINSON, GRETA LEE

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2442 Ex Parte Boleyn et al 10211047 - (D) DANG 103 Schwabe Williamson & Wyatt ZHANG, SHIRLEY X

The prima facie burden has not been met and the rejection does not adhere to the minimal requirements of 35 U.S.C. § 132 “when a rejection is so uninformative that it prevents the applicant from recognizing and seeking to counter the grounds for rejection.” Chester v. Miller, 906 F.2d 1574, 1578 (Fed. Cir. 1990).

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3683 Ex Parte Schoen et al 10784719 - (D) CRAWFORD 103 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 101 PETER K. TRZYNA, ESQ. MEINECKE DIAZ, SUSANNA M

In regard to the claims that recite the additional steps of computing, monitoring, signaling, notifying, etc., these steps relate to only ordinary functions of a computer and do not confer patent eligibility to the claims.
See Bancorp Servs., L.L.C. v. Sun Life Assurance Co., 687 F.3d 1266, 1278–79 (Fed. Cir. 2012).

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1631 Ex Parte Jung et al 11471289 - (D) GRIMES 103 103 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 112(2) Constellation Law Group, PLLC CLOW, LORI A

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2164 Ex Parte Zhang et al 12133766 - (D) HOFF 112(2)/103 112(2)/103 RYAN, MASON & LEWIS, LLP CHOI, YUK TING

2166 Ex Parte Peskin 11668368 - (D) WORMMEESTER 112(2)/101 103 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY LIN, SHEW FEN

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2649 Ex Parte Dominique et al 11139693 - (D) FRAHM 102(e) 102(e)/103 HARNESS, DICKEY & PIERCE, P.L.C. NGUYEN, HAI V

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1715 Ex Parte Hilger et al 10415201 - (D) TIMM 103 Quinn Law Group, PLLC LIGHTFOOT, ELENA TSOY

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2156 Ex Parte Dettinger et al 11272583 - (D) Per Curiam 103 IBM CORPORATION ROSTAMI, MOHAMMAD S

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2465 Ex Parte LEIGH 11554294 - (D) BRANCH 103 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY WYLLIE, CHRISTOPHER T

2468 Ex Parte Flanagan et al 11445103 - (D) HUGHES 103 TEXAS INSTRUMENTS INCORPORATED CHU, WUTCHUNG

2492 Ex Parte Schiller 11799217 - (D) DANG 102(e)/103 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY MOORTHY, ARAVIND K

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2612 Ex Parte Hunt et al 11570080 - (D) DANG 103 RENNER, OTTO, BOISSELLE & SKLAR, LLP CASCHERA, ANTONIO A

2643 Ex Parte Ahn 11773192 - (D) STRAUSS 103 THE FARRELL LAW FIRM, P.C. HTUN, SAN A

2646 Ex Parte Yang et al 11789446 - (D) DANG 103 Lewis Roca Rothgerber LLP - Ruckus IQBAL, KHAWAR

2651 Ex Parte Self 11332581 - (D) KINDER 103 ROBERT M. SCHWARTZ, P.A. GAY, SONIA L

2657 Ex Parte Bangalore et al 11646983 - (D) DIXON 102 AT & T LEGAL DEPARTMENT - Slusky ROBERTS, SHAUN A

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2814 Ex Parte Wong et al 11185031 - (D) COLAIANNI 102/103 HUGHES HUBBARD & REED LLP SAYADIAN, HRAYR

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3638 Ex Parte Maier-Hunke 11992443 - (D) ASTORINO 102/103 Mark P. Stone KIM, SHIN H

3695 Ex Parte Lundquist 11989449 - (D) CHERRY 103 Hemingway & Hansen, LLP OYEBISI, OJO O

REEXAMINATION

REVERSED
Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3671 Ex parte EXMARK MFG. CO., INC. Patent Owner Ex Parte 5987863 et al 09/135,926 90012406 - (D) BROWN 103 JAMES W. MILLER, ATTORNEY Arnold & Porter LLP FETSUGA, ROBERT M original BATSON, VICTOR D

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3738 MEDTRONIC, INC. Requester, Respondent v. EDWARDS LIFESCIENCES AG Patent Owner, Appellant Ex Parte 7789909 et al 12/557,458 95001615 - (D) SONG 112(1) EDWARDS LIFESCIENCES CORPORATION WILLIAMS, CATHERINE SERKE original WILLSE, DAVID H

Tuesday, June 26, 2012

ICU, North American Vaccine, oelrich, continental can

REVERSED
1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1763 Ex Parte Grevers et al 11587778 - (D) COLAIANNI 103 KENYON & KENYON LLP LACLAIR, DARCY D

1781 Ex Parte Desai et al 11041399 - (D) GARRIS 112(2)/112(1)/103 CARSTENS & CAHOON, LLP GWARTNEY, ELIZABETH A

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2168 Ex Parte Mihaila et al 10950800 - (D) ELLURU 112(2)/102/103 RYAN, MASON & LEWIS, LLP MOBIN, HASANUL

2181 Ex Parte Davenport et al 10876111 - (D) STEPHENS 103 Howard Cohen UNELUS, ERNEST

2185 Ex Parte So et al 10750523 - (D) HOFF 102/103 TKHR (Broadcom) CAMPOS, YAIMA

2600 Communications
2627 Ex Parte Lydegraf et al 11146790 - (D) ZECHER 103 MYERS BIGEL SIBLEY & SAJOVEC NGUYEN, HOA T

2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2836 Ex Parte Arndt et al 11792166 - (D) HOFF 102/103 LERNER GREENBERG STEMER LLP AMRANY, ADI

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3612 Ex Parte Gulker et al 11939132 - (D) LEE 112(1)/112(2) PRICE HENEVELD LLP FORD GLOBAL TECHNOLOGIES, LLC PATEL, KIRAN B

All of the components of the assembly in a specific implementation need not be recited in any claim unless the specification indicates that applicant did not invent subject matter that is without such specifics. See ICU Medical, Inc. v. Alaris Medical Systems, Inc., 558 F.3d 1368, 1378 (Fed. Cir. 2009).

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3734 Ex Parte Thill 10419412 - (D) GREEN 102 EV3, INC. MENDOZA, MICHAEL G

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1714 Ex Parte Aaron et al 11242203 - (D) GAUDETTE 112(1)/102/103 112(2)/103 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY GOLIGHTLY, ERIC WAYNE

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2171 Ex Parte Kim 10822847 - (D) SIU 103 103 Stanzione & Kim, LLP SALOMON, PHENUEL S

2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2811 Ex Parte Dokumaci et al 11151506 - (D) HOFF 102/103 103 F. CHAU & ASSOCIATES, LLC ARENA, ANDREW OWENS

AFFIRMED
1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1722 Ex Parte KODAMA 11851088 - (D) COLAIANNI 102/103 SUGHRUE MION, PLLC ANGEBRANNDT, MARTIN J

1722 Ex Parte Minsek et al 11031118 - (D) COLAIANNI 103 MOORE & VAN ALLEN PLLC EOFF, ANCA

1773 Ex Parte Kihlberg et al 11571631 - (D) GARRIS 112(2)/103 GE HEALTHCARE, INC. SASAKI, SHOGO

1784 Ex Parte Canady et al 11041274 - (D) KRATZ 103/obviousness-type double patenting rejection WILSONART INTERNATIONAL, INC. CIO WELSH & FLAXMAN, LLC SA MPLE, DA VID R

1798 Ex Parte Aseere 11438732 - (D) GAUDETTE 103 JOHNS MANVILLE JUSKA, CHERYL ANN

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2111 Ex Parte Zinaty et al 11096941 - (D) BISK 102/103 MISSION/BSTZ BLAKELY SOKOLOFF TAYLOR & ZAFMAN LLP CLEARY, THOMAS J

2156 Ex Parte Beringer et al 11185222 - (D) BARRY 103 BLAKELY SOKOLOFF TAYLOR & ZAFMAN LLP VO, TRUONG V

2174 Ex Parte Proehl et al 10767473 - (D) SIU 103 MILLER PATENT SERVICES NGUYEN, LE V

2177 Ex Parte Kraemer 10256632 - (D) McNAMARA 112(1) 112(1)/103 STERNE, KESSLER, GOLDSTEIN & FOX P.L.L.C. HUYNH, THU V

Appellant cites North American Vaccine, Inc. v. American Cyanamid Co., 7 F.3d, 1571 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Appellant points out that North American Vaccine mentions that the use of “a” in a claim can mean “one or more.” However, North American Vaccine also states that “[w]hen the meaning of a claim term is in doubt, we look to the specification for guidance.” Id. at 1576.

Appellant’s citation to the mere use of “a” in the specification to support the argument that “a” means “one or more” in the claims is inconsistent with North American Vaccine. (App. Br. 22). In North American Vaccine the court found no indication in the patent specification that the inventors intended “a” to have other than its normal singular meaning. Id.

2191 Ex Parte Gerken et al 10904106 - (D) DANG 103 Greg Goshorn, P.C. RAMPURIA, SATISH

2400 Networking, Mulitplexing, Cable, and Security
2422 Ex Parte Hamilton et al 10296690 - (D) SMITH 103 Thomson Multimedia Licensing Inc DESIR, JEAN WICEL

2433 Ex Parte Poletto et al 10701353 - (D) DIXON 103 Riverbed Technology Inc. - PVF c/o PARK, VAUGHAN, FLEMING & DOWLER LLP TRAN, ELLEN C

2600 Communications
2626 Ex Parte Beyerlein 10479554 - (D) DROESCH 102/103 US Philips Corporation GODBOLD, DOUGLAS

The use of extrinsic evidence is permissible to show that the missing descriptive material is necessarily present in the prior art reference description and that it would be so recognized by persons of ordinary skill. Continental Can Co, U.S.A. v. Monsanto Co., 948 F.2d 1264, 1268 (Fed. Cir. 1991) (citing In re Oelrich, 666 F.2d 578, 581 (CCPA 1981)).

Continental Can Co. v. Monsanto Co., 948 F.2d 1264, 20 USPQ2d 1746 (Fed. Cir. 1991).. . .2131.01

Oelrich, In re, 666 F.2d 578, 212 USPQ 323 (CCPA 1981) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2112

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3688 Ex Parte Eaton et al 10698648 - (D) TURNER 103 VAN OPHEM & VANOPHEM, PC REMY J VANOPHEM, PC VIG, NARESH

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3731 NuVASIVE, INC., Requester and Appellant v. ZIMMER SPINE, INC., Patent Owner and Respondent 95000449 6936051 LEBOVITZ 102/103 MARTIN & FERRARO, LLP CLARK, JEANNE MARIE original REIP, DAVID OWEN

3763 Ex Parte Akiyama et al 11522496 - (D) PRATS 103 SEED INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW GROUP PLLC SHUMATE, VICTORIA PEARL

3767 Ex Parte Parsee et al 11264420 - (D) OSINSKI 102 HODGSON RUSS LLP GILBERT, ANDREW M