SEARCH

PTAB.US

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

Showing posts with label porter2. Show all posts
Showing posts with label porter2. Show all posts

Tuesday, August 18, 2020

porter2




REVERSED 
1627 DEBREGEAS ET ASSOCIES PHARMA 14381896 - (D) FLAX 103 OLIFF PLC 
CHONG, YONG SOO

1741 Tatsuhiro Sato et al. 12515727 - (D) WILSON 103 Cheng Law Group, PLLC
HOFFMANN, JOHN M

2169 Facebook, Inc. 13759838 - (D) PYONIN 102/103 Facebook/Fenwick SKHOUN, HICHAM

2175 Facebook, Inc. 14308188 - (D) KUMAR 112(1)/112(2)/103 Keller Jolley Preece/Facebook HO, RUAY L

2425 Dolby Laboratories Licensing Corporation 15175962 - (D) MANTIS MERCADER 103 FISH & RICHARDSON P.C. (Dolby) VO, TUNG T

2465 Marc Aoun et al. 14759817 - (D) FRAHM 103 Signify Holding B.V. LAM, YEE F

2647 Thierry Huque et al. 13583148 - (D) PINKERTON 103 Seed IP Law Group LLP/ST (EP ORIGINATING) DU, HUNG K

2867 Udo Ausserlechner et al. 14251861 - (D) DEJMEK 102/103 Infineon Technologies AG c/o Schiff Hardin LLP LE, THANG XUAN

3622 Facebook, Inc. 14562547 - (D) ADAMS 101/102 BakerHostetler / Facebook
TOKARCZYK, CHRISTOPHER B

3632 Timothy D. Sellis et al. 14847706 - (D) MEDLOCK 102/103 DICKINSON WRIGHT PLLC
WUJCIAK, ALFRED J

3646 John R. Bass et al. 13340675 - (D) MARSCHALL 103 Ryan Alley IP (GE Docket) 
DAVIS, SHARON M

3657 Shimano Inc. 14712082 - (D) STEPINA 103 GLOBAL IP COUNSELORS, LLP David Tarnoff SCHWARTZ, CHRISTOPHER P

3731 Sweeney, Shaun 13424107 - (D) STEPINA 103 ST. ONGE STEWARD JOHNSTON & REENS, LLC WITTENSCHLAEGER, THOMAS M

3741 General Electric Company 15189061 - (D) STAICOVICI 112(1)/103 GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY c/o Trego, Hines & Ladenheim, PLLC GOYAL, ARUN

3745 United Technologies Corporation 14794516 - (D) STAICOVICI 103 Getz Balich LLC WONG, ELTON K

AFFIRMED-IN-PART 
1787 PPG Industries Ohio, Inc. 14198629 - (D) RANGE 112(1) 103 PPG Industries, Inc. LOWREY, DANIEL D

2653 Mani, Senthil Kumar. et al. 14870458 - (D) BELISLE 112(2) 103 Potomac Law Group PLLC (IMGTEC) HASHEM, LISA

 But, as argued by Appellant (Reply Br. 1–3), the Examiner does not explain how “the result” is amenable to two or more plausible claim constructions, or otherwise how the scope of claim 16 would not be reasonably ascertainable by the skilled artisan.  See Ex parte Porter, 25 USPQ2d 1144, 1145 (BPAI 1992) (“controlled stream of fluid” provided reasonable antecedent basis for “the controlled fluid”).  As such, we find the Examiner has not provided sufficient evidence or technical reasoning to show that the limitation “the result” renders claim 16 indefinite. 

Porter, Ex parte, 25 USPQ2d 1144 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1992) 608.01(n) , 2173.05(e) , 2173.05(f) , 2173.05(q)

3724 AC (Macao Commercial Offshore) Limited 14930006 - (D) SCHOPFER 103 103 Michael Best & Friedrich LLP (TTi) DONG, LIANG

3745 UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION 15026709 - (D) KERINS 102/103 102/103 CARLSON, GASKEY & OLDS/PRATT & WHITNEY EASTMAN, AARON ROBERT

3791 Hill-Rom Services, Inc. 15000258 - (D) PESLAK 102 102 HILL-ROM SERVICES, INC.  CERIONI, DANIEL LEE

AFFIRMED 
1611 XEP, INC. 15027910 - (D) JENKS 103 Olson & Cepuritis, LTD. LAZARO, DOMINIC

1626 Philipp Stoessel et al. 12781981 - (D) CHANG 112(1) 112(1) Pepper Hamilton LLP (Rochester)
KOSACK, JOSEPH R

1631 Ilan Sadeh 14246100 - (D) ADAMS 101 Dr. Mark M. Friedman WOITACH, JOSEPH T

1631 Carl W. Riley et al. 14493475 - (D) WISZ 101 Barnes & Thornburg LLP (Hill-Rom)
WISE, OLIVIA M.

1639 Sampson, Jeffrey R. et al. 14486346 - (D) FREDMAN 102/103 Agilent Technologies, Inc. KAUP, SAHANA S

1716 Albano, Fabio et al. 13103008 - (D) DENNETT 103 MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP 
FORD, NATHAN K

1741 Lee, Juifeng 14155345 - (D) DENNETT 103 Allan A. Miller LAZORCIK, JASON L

1745 VESTAS WIND SYSTEMS A/S 14758654 - (D) GAUDETTE 103 Wood, Herron & Evans, LLP (Vestas Wind Systems) PAGE, HANA C

1748 Dieter Homoelle et al. 15385090 - (D) DENNETT 103 KF ROSS PC HOOVER, MATTHEW

1776 Stehle, Gerhard et al. 12735988 - (D) REN 112(1)/103 WENDEROTH, LIND & PONACK, L.L.P. ANBACHT, BRIT ELIZA

1782 Schuhmann, Michael et al. 14240268 - (D) HOUSEL 103 CROWELL & MORING LLP PATTERSON, MARC A

1787 PPG Industries Ohio, Inc. 14075288 - (D) GAUDETTE 102/103 PPG Industries, Inc.
SHUKLA, KRUPA

2122 Massachusetts Institute of Technology 14598628 - (D) BEAMER 101 Massachusetts Institute of Technology c/o Daly Crowley Mofford & Durkee LLP MISIR, DAYWAYSHWAR D

2153 Robin Wallace. Glover 13306798 - (D) SILVERMAN 101/103 FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, GARRETT & DUNNER LLP VO, CECILE H

2182 Oracle International Corporation 14880798 - (D) SHAH 101 HICKMAN PALERMO BECKER BINGHAM/ORACLE LAROCQUE, EMILY E

2486 University of Utah Research Foundation 13948035 - (D) RAEVSKY 103 112(1) THORPE NORTH & WESTERN, LLP. BOYLAN, JAMES T

2692 SONY MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS INC. 13863805 - (D) DIXON 103 XSENSUS LLP OSORIO, RICARDO

2814 Tieh-Chiang Wu et al. 15003812 - (D) WILSON 103 TRASK BRITT, P.C./ MICRON TECHNOLOGY TANG, SUIAN

2832 SIEMENS INDUSTRY, INC. 14473075 - (D) HOUSEL 103 SIEMENS CORPORATION NGUYEN, VIET P

2835 YAZAKI CORPORATION 15080320 - (D) INGLESE 103 KENEALY VAIDYA LLP
BUTTAR, MANDEEP S

2858 WU, PETER et al. 12761281 - (D) PRAISS 101 Schlumberger Technology Center
SCHINDLER, DAVID M

2895 SEMICONDUCTOR COMPONENTS INDUSTRIES, LLC 15410288 - (D) DELMENDO 112(1)/112(2)/102/103 SEMICONDUCTOR COMPONENTS INDUSTRIES, LLC (AS) JUNG, MICHAEL

3618 MOORE, Jeremy et al. 15155765 - (D) SONG 103 BROOKS KUSHMAN P.C./FGTL
CLEMMONS, STEVE M

3621 Katch, LLC 14485565 - (D) GRIMES 103 101 PERKINS COIE LLP - SEA General
SNIDER, SCOTT

3624 Acxiom Corporation 14338172 - (D) CALVE 101 Wright, Lindsey & Jennings LLP - Acxiom YESILDAG, MEHMET

3626 Cyberonics, Inc. 14505151 - (D) NAPPI 103 101 FOLEY & LARDNER LLP
COBANOGLU, DILEK B

3626 International Business Machines Corporation 14514563 - (D) STRAUSS 101 IBM CORPORATION- AUSTIN (JVL) C/O LESLIE A. VAN LEEUWEN BLANCHETTE, JOSHUA B

3686 KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS N.V. 14572984 - (D) LEE 101 PHILIPS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY & STANDARDS LE, LINH GIANG

3687 Pourfallah, Stacy et al. 12630748 - (D) FREDMAN 103 41.50 101 LOEB & LOEB, LLP YU, ARIEL J

3689 Black Hills IP Holdings, LLC 14154054 - (D) JEFFERY 103 101 SCHWEGMAN LUNDBERG & WOESSNER, P.A. YOUNG, MICHAEL C

3691 Ginsberg, Philip M. et al. 13616839 - (D) HUME 101 CANTOR FITZGERALD, L.P. AKINTOLA, OLABODE

3692 MasterCard International Incorporated 14252254 - (D) THOMAS 101 Mastercard International Incorporated c/o Buckley, Maschoff & Talwalkar LLC FELTEN, DANIEL S

3693 STOXX Ltd. 14670392 - (D) WISZ 112(1)/101 Rimon PC BARTLEY, KENNETH

3694 Chicago Mercantile Exchange, Inc. 13918297 - (D) CURCURI 101/103 Lempia Summerfield Katz LLC/CME NGUYEN, TIEN C

3695 COHEN GANOR, Shlomo et al. 13605142 - (D) HOFFMANN 112(1) 101 Pearl Cohen Zedek Latzer Baratz LLP POLLOCK, GREGORY A

3695 Clifford J. Weber et al. 14788931 - (D) HUME 112(1)/112(2)/101/103 OTDP IP GROUP OF DLA PIPER LLP (US) POLLOCK, GREGORY A

3754 GOJO Industries, Inc. 15211257 - (D) GUIJT 102/103 Calfee, Halter & Griswold LLP NICHOLS II, ROBERT K
Posted by at No comments :
Labels:

Tuesday, August 26, 2014

chitayat, nautilus, energizer holdings, porter2

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1733 Ex Parte Fanning 12790502 - (D) GARRIS 103 BGL/Detroit YANG, JIE

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2656 Ex Parte Ohashi et al 11277200 - (D) PAULRAJ 103 SEMICONDUCTOR COMPONENTS INDUSTRIES, LLC JAMAL, ALEXANDER

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3724 Ex Parte Laub 12139075 - (D) WORTH 103 Burrus Intellectual Property Law Group LLC DAVIES, SAMUEL ALLEN

3766 Ex Parte Gerber 11261443 - (D) PER CURIAM 103 SHUMAKER & SIEFFERT , P.A GHAND, JENNIFER LEIGH-STEWAR

3773 Ex Parte Feinberg 10674653 - (D) SCHOPFER 112(1)/103 ROBERTS MLOTKOWSKI SAFRAN & COLE, P.C. RYCKMAN, MELISSA K

3774 Ex Parte Chuter et al 12338020 - (D) PER CURIAM 102/103 MATTHEWS, WILLIAM H BGL/Cook - Chicago

The Examiner’s reasoning is not persuasive. Patent drawings are not necessarily intended to show accurate relative dimensions and “arguments based on mere measurement of the drawings [are] of little value.” In re Chitayat, 408 F.2d 475, 478 (CCPA 1969).

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2465 Ex Parte Ould-Brahim 12064477 - (D) MacDONALD 103 112(2) 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 112(2) WITHROW & TERRANOVA, P.L.L.C. HSU, ALPUS

2493 Ex Parte Campbell et al 11733354 - (D) McKEOWN 103 101 IBM (RPS-BKLS) c/o Biggers Kennedy Lenart Spraggins LLP LE, CHAU D

AFFIRMED 
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1716 Ex Parte Pass 11505658 - (D) HOUSEL 102/103 SunPower/ BSTZ Blakely Sokoloff Taylor & Zafman LLP MOORE, KARLA A

1734 Ex Parte Ylimäinen 12301262 - (D) HASTINGS 103 CHERNOFF, VILHAUER, MCCLUNG & STENZEL, LLP LEE, REBECCA Y

1744 Ex Parte LUBURIC 12793748 - (D) GARRIS 102/103 MORRIS MANNING MARTIN LLP LEE, EDMUND H

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3721 Ex Parte Zemlok et al 12189834 - (D) WARNER 102(e) Covidien LP WEEKS, GLORIA R

3741 Ex Parte Norris et al 12131280 - (D) SMEGAL 112(2) 103 CARLSON, GASKEY & OLDS/PRATT & WHITNEY c/o CPA Global SUTHERLAND, STEVEN M

Definiteness under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, requires that “a patent’s claims, viewed in light of the specification and prosecution history, inform those skilled in the art about the scope of the invention with reasonable clarity.” Nautilus, Inc. v. Biosig Instruments, Inc., 134 S.Ct. 2120, 2129 (2014).

 We further note that if the scope of a claim would be reasonably ascertainable by those skilled in the art, then the claim is not indefinite. Energizer Holdings Inc. v. Int’l Trade Comm’n, 435 F.3d 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2006) (holding that “anode gel” provided by implication the antecedent basis for “zinc anode”); Ex parte Porter, 25 USPQ2d 1144, 1145 (BPAI 1992) (“controlled stream of fluid” provided reasonable antecedent basis for “the controlled fluid”). For these reasons, we reverse the rejection of claims 1−20 under 35 U.S.C. §112, second paragraph.

Energizer Holdings Inc. v. Int’l Trade Comm’n, 435 F.3d 1366, 77 USPQ2d 1625 (Fed. Cir. 2006) 2173.05(e)

 Porter, Ex parte, 25 USPQ2d 1144 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1992) 608.01(n) , 2173.05(e) , 2173.05(f) , 2173.05(q)

3775 Ex Parte de Villiers et al 11829056 - (D) PAULRAJ 103 WILSON, SONSINI, GOODRICH & ROSATI SCHAPER, MICHAEL T

REEXAMINATION

 REVERSED
Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3616 PRIDE MOBILITY PRODUCTS CORPORATION Patent Owner/Appellant v. PERMOBIL, INC. Requester/Respondent Ex Parte 8181992 et al 95002355 - (D) MARTIN 103 Baker & Hostetler LLP Third Party: WILMERHALE / DC ENGLISH, PETER C original BROWN, DREW J
Posted by at No comments :
Labels: , , ,

Friday, June 17, 2011

porter2, kuehl, blattner, pfizer, steele, kropa

REVERSED

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3654 Ex Parte Burkart et al 11/401,558 GREENHUT 103(a) 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 112(4) TAROLLI, SUNDHEIM, COVELL & TUMMINO L.L.P. EXAMINER KRUER, STEFAN

35 U.S.C. § 112, paragraph four, requires that a dependent claim specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. Claim 6 recites in its entirety, “An electric belt retractor with a control arrangement to carry out the method of claim 1.” Reciting that the intended use of a claimed apparatus is “to carry out” a particular method does not further limit that method. Intent relates to a state of mind and there is nothing in claim 6 actually requiring performance of the steps recited in claim 1. See, e.g., In re Hansen, 99 USPQ 319, 321 (BPAI 1953); compare In re Porter, 25 USPQ2d 1144, 1147 (BPAI 1992) (citing In re Kuehl, 475 F.2d 658 (CCPA 1973) and In re Blattner, 2 USPQ2d 2047 (BPAI 1987)); See also MPEP § 608.01(n)(III).

Claims 7-13 depend from claim 6. Only claim 6 contains a reference to claim 1. Accordingly, we find claims 6-13 fail to comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. § 112, paragraph four. See Pfizer, Inc. v. Ranbaxy Labs. Ltd., 457 F.3d 1284, 1292 (Fed. Cir. 2006). We recognize that the Appellants could have drafted claims 6-13 as properly depending from claim 1 or could have written claim 6 in independent form. However, we decline to speculate about what the Appellants intend to claim and reverse, pro forma, the Examiner’s rejections of claims 6-13 without opinion on the merits thereof. See id.; see also In re Steele, 305 F.2d 859, 862 (CCPA 1962).

Kuehl, In re, 425 F.2d 658, 177 USPQ 250 (CCPA 1973) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2116.01

Steele, In re, 305 F.2d 859, 134 USPQ 292 (CCPA 1959) . . . . . . . . . . . . .2143.03, 2173.06

Porter, Ex parte, 25 USPQ2d 1144 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1992) . . . .608.01(n), 2173.05(e), 2173.05(f), 2173.05(q)

Blattner, Ex parte, 2 USPQ2d 2047 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987) . . . . . . . . . . . 2144.09
3673 Ex Parte Kavounas 11/248,929 SPAHN 102(b)/103(a) KOLISCH HARTWELL, P.C. EXAMINER SANTOS, ROBERT G

See Kropa v. Robie, 187 F.2d 150, 152 (CCPA 1951) (A preamble reciting “‘An abrasive article’” was deemed essential to point out the invention defined by claims to an article comprising abrasive grains and a hardened binder and the process of making it. The court stated “it is only by that phrase that it can be known that the subject matter defined by the claims is comprised as an abrasive article. Every union of substances capable inter alia of use as abrasive grains and a binder is not an ‘abrasive article.’” Therefore, the preamble served to further define the structure of the article produced.).

Kropa v. Robie, 187 F.2d 150, 88 USPQ 478 (CCPA 1951) . . . . . . . . . . . . 707.07(f), 2111.02
AFFIRMED-IN-PART

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3754 Ex Parte Rice 11/003,199 KAUFFMAN 112(1)/102(b)/103(a) Patrick S. Yoder FLETCHER YODER EXAMINER BRINSON, PATRICK F
AFFIRMED

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2166 Ex Parte Tsang et al 11/169,095 HOMERE 101/103(a) CAREY, RODRIGUEZ, GREENBERG & PAUL, LLP STEVEN M. GREENBERG EXAMINER TANG, JIEYING

2186 Ex Parte Rau 11/021,707 DANG 103(a) SAP/BSTZ BLAKELY SOKOLOFF TAYLOR & ZAFMAN LLP EXAMINER BIRKHIMER, CHRISTOPHER D

REHEARING

GRANTED

2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2883 Ex Parte Fernald et al 10/755,708 FRAHM 103(a) PATTERSON & SHERIDAN, L.L.P. EXAMINER EL SHAMMAA, MARY A

NEW

REVERSED

1729 Ex Parte Drake et al 10/664,822 TIMM 112(1)/112(2)/102(b)/103(a) FISH & RICHARDSON P.C. (BO) EXAMINER HODGE, ROBERT W

AFFIRMED-IN-PART

2165 Ex Parte Buros et al 11/268,931 BLANKENSHIP 101/102(b)/103(a) 37 C.F.R. 41.50(b) 112(2)/112(4) IBM CORP (YA) EXAMINER HOANG, SON T

AFFIRMED

2815 Ex Parte Chen et al 11/230,772 KOHUT 102(e)/103(a) SCHWEGMAN, LUNDBERG & WOESSNER, P.A. EXAMINER CLARK, JASMINE JHIHAN B

2448 Ex Parte Karaoguz et al 10/675,653 COURTENAY 102(b)/103(a) MCANDREWS HELD & MALLOY, LTD EXAMINER STRANGE, AARON N

2425 Ex Parte Kelly 10/515,696 FRAHM 101/103(a) PHILIPS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY & STANDARDS EXAMINER LEWIS, JONATHAN V

2453 Ex Parte Shalabi et al 10/984,090 CHEN 102(e)/103(a) CAREY, RODRIGUEZ, GREENBERG & PAUL, LLP STEVEN M. GREENBERG EXAMINER NGUYEN, THU HA T

2166 Ex Parte Stecker 10/918,520 MORGAN 103(a) HESLIN ROTHENBERG FARLEY & MESITI P.C. EXAMINER PHAM, KHANH B

1761 Ex Parte Trinh 11/059,078 HASTINGS 112(2)/102(b)/103(a) THE PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY EXAMINER HARDEE, JOHN R
Posted by at No comments :
Labels: , , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts ( Atom )