custom search
REVERSED
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2185 Ex Parte Hughes 11497026 - (D) PERRY 103 CARR & FERRELL LLP AYASH, MARWAN
Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3766 Ex Parte Mas et al 12108125 - (D) EVANS 102/103 MEDTRONIC VASCULAR, INC. KOHARSKI, CHRISTOPHER
AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1711 Ex Parte Czyzewski et al 11886939 - (D) HOUSEL 102 102/103 BSH HOME APPLIANCES CORPORATION KLING, CHARLES
AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1611 Ex Parte Upadhyay 09879320 - (D) MILLS 103 Rhodia Inc. CHANNAVAJJALA, LAKSHMI SARADA
1616 Ex Parte Dutzmann et al 09843396 - (D) McCOLLUM 103 STERNE, KESSLER, GOLDSTEIN & FOX P.L.L.C. CHOI, FRANK I
In addition, we do not agree with Appellants that the group of compounds of which compound (III) is a member is so large as to make this the “needle-in-the-haystack” situation discussed in In re Luvisi, 342 F.2d 102, 106 (CCPA 1965).
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1715 Ex Parte Decesare et al 12052859 - (D) TIMM 103 CARMODY & TORRANCE LLP BAREFORD, KATHERINE A
1729 Ex Parte Alexandrovichserov et al 11723198 - (D) DANG 103 ROBERT E. BUSHNELL & LAW FIRM RUDDOCK, ULA CORINNA
1741 Ex Parte Koenen et al 10558637 - (D) GARRIS 103 NIXON & VANDERHYE, PC BELYAEV, YANA
1762 Ex Parte Shimomura 11655211 - (D) HANLON 103 SUGHRUE MION, PLLC JONES JR., ROBERT STOCKTON
1786 Ex Parte Maziers et al 10553572 - (D) OBERMANN 102/103 FINA TECHNOLOGY INC LOPEZ, RICARDO E.
Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2426 Ex Parte Bennett et al 11328673 - (D) DANG 103 GARLICK & MARKISON HSIUNGFEI, PENG
2427 Ex Parte Kellerman et al 10674672 - (D) DANG 103 GARLICK & MARKISON SCHNURR, JOHN R
2461 Ex Parte Karaoguz et al 11093157 - (D) DANG 112(1)/103 Broadcom/BHGL LEVITAN, DMITRY
Tech Center 2600 Communications
2629 Ex Parte C. Anderson 11174130 - (D) KOHUT 103 SCENERA RESEARCH, LLC MCCOMMAS, STUART S
2677 Ex Parte Covell et al 11149720 - (D) MacDONALD 103 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY WANG, JIN CHENG
2677 Ex Parte Friedman et al 11429546 - (D) WEINBERG 103 THE SMALL PATENT LAW GROUP LLC SAMS, MICHELLE L
Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2828 Ex Parte Ketteridge 11346648 - (D) FRAHM 103 BAE SYSTEMS ZHANG, YUANDA
Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3721 Ex Parte Riga et al 11944835 - (D) WOOD 103 RENNER OTTO BOISSELLE & SKLAR, LLP TAWFIK, SAMEH
“Combining the teachings of references does not involve an ability to combine their specific structures.” In re Nievelt, 482 F.2d 965, 968 (CCPA 1973).
Nievelt, In re, 482 F.2d 965, 179 USPQ 224 (CCPA 1973) 2145
3736 Ex Parte Levendusky et al 11120436 - (D) EVANS 103 MAYER & WILLIAMS PC SZMAL, BRIAN SCOTT
3763 Ex Parte Brodersen 10936674 - (D) MILLS 102 SHLESINGER, ARKWRIGHT & GARVEY LLP VU, QUYNH-NHU HOANG
3767 Ex Parte Stypulkowski 11168752 - (D) RICE 103 Medtronic, Inc. (CRDM) SCOTT, BRANDY C
REHEARING
GRANTED
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2162 Ex Parte Roach et al 09957459 - (D) STEPHENS 112(2)/103 CAHN & SAMUELS LLP TO, BAOQUOC N
Showing posts with label nievelt. Show all posts
Showing posts with label nievelt. Show all posts
Thursday, November 15, 2012
Monday, April 2, 2012
nievelt, unique concepts, gaus, net moneyin
REVERSED
1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1712 Ex Parte Hollenhorst et al 10/978,006 PAK 103(a) Leydig, Voit & Mayer, Ltd. (Frankfurt office) EXAMINER WALDBAUM, SAMUEL A
2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2175 Ex Parte Kowalski 09/928,599 WINSOR 103(a) GATES & COOPER LLP EXAMINER ORR, HENRY W
2400 Networking, Mulitplexing, Cable, and Security
2473 Ex Parte Conradt et al 10/759,073 BAUMEISTER 103(a) STAAS & HALSEY LLP EXAMINER RUTKOWSKI, JEFFREY M
3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3731 Ex Parte Pavcnik et al 10/662,216 BONILLA 102(e)/103(a) 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 102(e) BRINKS HOFER GILSON & LIONE EXAMINER LANG, AMY T
AFFIRMED-IN-PART
2400 Networking, Mulitplexing, Cable, and Security
2492 Ex Parte Burget et al 10/652,010 BISK 102(e)/103(a) 102(e)/103(a) HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY EXAMINER MOORTHY, ARAVIND K
3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3724 Ex Parte Morabito 11/307,939 CLARKE 103(a) 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 103(a) KELLY LOWRY & KELLEY, LLP EXAMINER PRONE, JASON D
AFFIRMED
1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1723 Ex Parte Vipperla et al 11/297,774 HANLON 103(a) GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY EXAMINER HANDAL, KAITY V
1745 Ex Parte Mathea 11/221,044 SMITH nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting/103(a) KLAUS J. BACH EXAMINER KOCH, GEORGE R
1763 Ex Parte Noguchi et al 11/594,933 WARREN 103(a) OLIFF & BERRIDGE, PLC EXAMINER LACLAIR, DARCY D
1784 Ex Parte Mosley et al 11/475,528 KRATZ 103(a) TROP, PRUNER & HU, P.C. EXAMINER LAM, CATHY FONG FONG
2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2111 Ex Parte Leach 11/748,318 JEFFERY 102(b)/103(a) FOLEY & LARDNER LLP EXAMINER VU, TRISHA U
2171 Ex Parte Githens et al 10/660,143 BISK 103(a) IBM CORPORATION EXAMINER NUNEZ, JORDANY
“Combining the teachings of references does not involve an ability to combine their specific structures.” In re Nievelt, 482 F.2d 965, 968 (CCPA 1973).
Nievelt, In re, 482 F.2d 965, 179 USPQ 224 (CCPA 1973) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2145
2445 Ex Parte Geekee et al 10/740,410 WHITEHEAD, JR. 102(e)/103(a) WITHROW & TERRANOVA, P.L.L.C. EXAMINER LIU, LIN
2400 Networking, Mulitplexing, Cable, and Security
2448 Ex Parte Secor et al 10/756,843 WHITEHEAD, JR. 101/102(e)/103(a) IBM Corp. (AUS) c/o Ostrow Kaufman LLP EXAMINER WHIPPLE, BRIAN P
2600 Communications
2626 Ex Parte Ruetschi 10/625,960 GIANNETTI 102(e)/103(a) Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney PC (SEN) EXAMINER RIDER, JUSTIN W
2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2856 Ex Parte Beimesch 10/724,564 HAHN 103(a) LATHROP & GAGE LLP EXAMINER ROGERS, DAVID A
3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3751 Ex Parte Bahash 10/737,920 SPAHN 102(b)/103(a) WINSTON & STRAWN LLP EXAMINER NGUYEN, TUAN N
3733 Ex Parte Wenstrom et al 10/951,107 BONILLA 103(a) PHILIP S. JOHNSON JOHNSON & JOHNSON EXAMINER COMSTOCK, DAVID C
3762 Ex Parte Kim et al 11/668,627 SCHEINER 102(b) SCHWEGMAN, LUNDBERG & WOESSNER, P.A. EXAMINER STOKLOSA, JOSEPH A
3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU)
2873 Ex Parte 6795605 et al INFINERA CORP. Third Party Requester, Appellant v. CHEETAH OMNI, LLC Patent Owner, Respondent 95/000,240 10/644,721 TURNER 102(e)/103(a) BROOKS KUSHMAN P.C. EXAMINER HUGHES, DEANDRA M original EXAMINER SPECTOR, DAVID N
2873 Ex Parte 7142347 et al INFINERA CORP. Third Party Requester, Appellant v. CHEETAH OMNI, LLC Patent Owner, Respondent 95/000,239 11/199,513 TURNER 102(b)/102(e)/103(a) BROOKS KUSHMAN P.C. EXAMINER HUGHES, DEANDRA M original EXAMINER SPECTOR, DAVID N
Where a claim provides for two separate elements, those two elements “logically cannot be one and the same.” Gaus v. Conair Corp., 363 F.3d 1284, 1288 (Fed.Cir.2004). See also Unique Concepts, Inc. v. Brown, 939 F.2d 1558, 1562 (Fed. Cir. 1991)( there can be no literal infringement where the patent in suit claims two elements and the accused device has only one element performing both functions). It is not enough that the prior art reference discloses part of the claimed invention, which an ordinary artisan might supplement to make the whole, or that it includes multiple, distinct teachings that the artisan might somehow combine to achieve the claimed invention. Net MoneyIn, Inc. v. Verisign, Inc., 545 F.3d 1359, 1369 (Fed. Cir. 2008).
1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1712 Ex Parte Hollenhorst et al 10/978,006 PAK 103(a) Leydig, Voit & Mayer, Ltd. (Frankfurt office) EXAMINER WALDBAUM, SAMUEL A
2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2175 Ex Parte Kowalski 09/928,599 WINSOR 103(a) GATES & COOPER LLP EXAMINER ORR, HENRY W
2400 Networking, Mulitplexing, Cable, and Security
2473 Ex Parte Conradt et al 10/759,073 BAUMEISTER 103(a) STAAS & HALSEY LLP EXAMINER RUTKOWSKI, JEFFREY M
3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3731 Ex Parte Pavcnik et al 10/662,216 BONILLA 102(e)/103(a) 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 102(e) BRINKS HOFER GILSON & LIONE EXAMINER LANG, AMY T
AFFIRMED-IN-PART
2400 Networking, Mulitplexing, Cable, and Security
2492 Ex Parte Burget et al 10/652,010 BISK 102(e)/103(a) 102(e)/103(a) HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY EXAMINER MOORTHY, ARAVIND K
3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3724 Ex Parte Morabito 11/307,939 CLARKE 103(a) 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 103(a) KELLY LOWRY & KELLEY, LLP EXAMINER PRONE, JASON D
AFFIRMED
1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1723 Ex Parte Vipperla et al 11/297,774 HANLON 103(a) GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY EXAMINER HANDAL, KAITY V
1745 Ex Parte Mathea 11/221,044 SMITH nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting/103(a) KLAUS J. BACH EXAMINER KOCH, GEORGE R
1763 Ex Parte Noguchi et al 11/594,933 WARREN 103(a) OLIFF & BERRIDGE, PLC EXAMINER LACLAIR, DARCY D
1784 Ex Parte Mosley et al 11/475,528 KRATZ 103(a) TROP, PRUNER & HU, P.C. EXAMINER LAM, CATHY FONG FONG
2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2111 Ex Parte Leach 11/748,318 JEFFERY 102(b)/103(a) FOLEY & LARDNER LLP EXAMINER VU, TRISHA U
2171 Ex Parte Githens et al 10/660,143 BISK 103(a) IBM CORPORATION EXAMINER NUNEZ, JORDANY
“Combining the teachings of references does not involve an ability to combine their specific structures.” In re Nievelt, 482 F.2d 965, 968 (CCPA 1973).
Nievelt, In re, 482 F.2d 965, 179 USPQ 224 (CCPA 1973) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2145
2445 Ex Parte Geekee et al 10/740,410 WHITEHEAD, JR. 102(e)/103(a) WITHROW & TERRANOVA, P.L.L.C. EXAMINER LIU, LIN
2400 Networking, Mulitplexing, Cable, and Security
2448 Ex Parte Secor et al 10/756,843 WHITEHEAD, JR. 101/102(e)/103(a) IBM Corp. (AUS) c/o Ostrow Kaufman LLP EXAMINER WHIPPLE, BRIAN P
2600 Communications
2626 Ex Parte Ruetschi 10/625,960 GIANNETTI 102(e)/103(a) Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney PC (SEN) EXAMINER RIDER, JUSTIN W
2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2856 Ex Parte Beimesch 10/724,564 HAHN 103(a) LATHROP & GAGE LLP EXAMINER ROGERS, DAVID A
3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3751 Ex Parte Bahash 10/737,920 SPAHN 102(b)/103(a) WINSTON & STRAWN LLP EXAMINER NGUYEN, TUAN N
3733 Ex Parte Wenstrom et al 10/951,107 BONILLA 103(a) PHILIP S. JOHNSON JOHNSON & JOHNSON EXAMINER COMSTOCK, DAVID C
3762 Ex Parte Kim et al 11/668,627 SCHEINER 102(b) SCHWEGMAN, LUNDBERG & WOESSNER, P.A. EXAMINER STOKLOSA, JOSEPH A
3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU)
2873 Ex Parte 6795605 et al INFINERA CORP. Third Party Requester, Appellant v. CHEETAH OMNI, LLC Patent Owner, Respondent 95/000,240 10/644,721 TURNER 102(e)/103(a) BROOKS KUSHMAN P.C. EXAMINER HUGHES, DEANDRA M original EXAMINER SPECTOR, DAVID N
2873 Ex Parte 7142347 et al INFINERA CORP. Third Party Requester, Appellant v. CHEETAH OMNI, LLC Patent Owner, Respondent 95/000,239 11/199,513 TURNER 102(b)/102(e)/103(a) BROOKS KUSHMAN P.C. EXAMINER HUGHES, DEANDRA M original EXAMINER SPECTOR, DAVID N
Where a claim provides for two separate elements, those two elements “logically cannot be one and the same.” Gaus v. Conair Corp., 363 F.3d 1284, 1288 (Fed.Cir.2004). See also Unique Concepts, Inc. v. Brown, 939 F.2d 1558, 1562 (Fed. Cir. 1991)( there can be no literal infringement where the patent in suit claims two elements and the accused device has only one element performing both functions). It is not enough that the prior art reference discloses part of the claimed invention, which an ordinary artisan might supplement to make the whole, or that it includes multiple, distinct teachings that the artisan might somehow combine to achieve the claimed invention. Net MoneyIn, Inc. v. Verisign, Inc., 545 F.3d 1359, 1369 (Fed. Cir. 2008).
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)