orthokinetics, Morris, zletz

custom search

REVERSED 
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2179 Ex Parte Garibaldi et al 11801121 - (D) McCOLLUM 102 Bryan K. Wheelock ITURRALDE, ENRIQUE W

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2436 Ex Parte Harris et al 11112938 - (D) HUGHES 103 Ryan, Mason & Lewis, LLP RAHIM, MONJUR

2453 Ex Parte Rohani 11280764 - (D) HOELTER 102/103 HAYNES AND BOONE, LLP ESKANDARNIA, ARVIN

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2829 Ex Parte Yokomae et al 11896153 - (D) HANLON 102/103 KANESAKA BERNER AND PARTNERS LLP SENGDARA, VONGSAVANH

2883 Ex Parte Stewart et al 12253196 - (D) GARRIS 103 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY TAVLYKAEV, ROBERT FUATOVICH

2893 Ex Parte Utsugi et al 11362652 - (D) TIMM 103 ADAMS & WILKS ULLAH, ELIAS

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2174 Ex Parte Joret et al 11421872 - (D) FREDMAN 103 103 IBM CORPORATION C/O: VanCott Bagley, Cornwall & McCarthy PHAM, LINH K

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3742 Ex Parte Berger 11374917 - (D) HOSKINS 103 103 MIRICK, O'CONNELL, DEMALLIE & LOUGEE, LLP PATEL, VINOD D

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2456 Ex Parte Enenkiel 11109725 - (D) HOELTER 103 SAP / FINNEGAN, HENDERSON LLP AHMED, MOHAMMED

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2859 Ex Parte Nolte 11713463 - (D) NAGUMO 103 KAMMER BROWNING PLLC OMAR, AHMED H

2893 Ex Parte Jang et al 11225089 - (D) PRAISS 103 CANTOR COLBURN LLP REAMES, MATTHEW L

2895 Ex Parte Juengling 12033799 - (D) TIMM 112(2)/102/103 FLETCHER YODER (MICRON TECHNOLOGY, INC.) JUNG, MICHAEL

Appellant argues that a relative term may be definite, citing to Orthokinetics, Inc. v. Safety Travel Chairs, Inc. 806 F. 2d 1565, 1576 (Fed. Cir. 1986). We agree with Appellant that relative terms can be definite in some circumstances. However, each case must be evaluated on its own facts. Moreover, we note that the court in Orthokinetics was evaluating the definiteness of a patented claim being litigated in an infringement action. Patented claims are subject to the presumption of validity and definiteness is evaluated under a different standard than claims still subject to prosecution. In re Morris, 127 F.3d 1048, 1054-56 (Fed. Cir. 1997). “An essential purpose of patent examination is to fashion claims that are precise, clear, correct, and unambiguous. Only in this way can uncertainties of claim scope be removed, as much as possible, during the administrative process.” In re Zletz, 893 F.2d 319, 322 (Fed. Cir. 1989).

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

Morris, In re, 127 F.3d 1048, 44 USPQ2d 1023 (Fed. Cir. 1997) 904.01, 2111, 2111.01, 2163, 2173.05(a), 2181

Zletz, In re, 893 F.2d 319, 13 USPQ2d 1320 (Fed. Cir. 1989)  715,   2111,   2111.01,   2111.03,   2138,   2171,   2173.05(a), 2181, 2286, 2686.04

griffin, hoffer, minton

the blogger search function has been broken for months, google knows this, to search for names (ie examiner's name or a company) use custom search (google cse) below.  to search for cases use tabs above

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 2600 Communications
2644 Ex Parte Yano et al 11067290 - (D) DIXON 103 SMITH, GAMBRELL & RUSSELL PEREZ, JULIO R

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2833 Ex Parte Takiguchi et al 11126127 - (D) GAUDETTE 103 HOLTZ, HOLTZ, GOODMAN & CHICK PC CAROC, LHEIREN MAE ANGLO

2835 Ex Parte Zhang et al 11421825 - (D) MURPHY 103 SIEMENS CORPORATION PAPE, ZACHARY

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2165 Ex Parte Chun et al 11139591 - (D) STRAUSS 103 103 NSIP LAW CHBOUKI, TAREK

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2156 Ex Parte Barsness et al 11833290 - (D) HUME 103 IBM CORPORATION KIM, TAELOR

The determination of whether recitations or clauses introduced by terms such as “wherein,” “whereby,” or, in the present appeal, “thereby” result in affirmative claim limitations which are to be given patentable weight depends on the specific facts of the case. See, e.g., Griffin v. Bertina, 285 F.3d 1029, 1034 (Fed. Cir. 2002) (finding that a “wherein” clause limited a process claim where the clause gave “meaning and purpose to the manipulative steps”). In re Hoffer v. Microsoft Corp., 405 F.3d 1326, 1329 (Fed. Cir. 2005), the court held that when a “‘whereby’ clause states a condition that is material to patentability, it cannot be ignored in order to change the substance of the invention.” Id. However, the court noted (quoting Minton v. Nat’l Ass’n of Securities Dealers, Inc., 336 F.3d 1373, 1381 (Fed. Cir. 2003)) that a “whereby clause in a method claim is not given weight when it simply expresses the intended result of a process step positively recited.” Id.

Griffin v. Bertina, 283 F.3d 1029, 62 USPQ2d 1431 (Fed. Cir. 2002) 2103, 2111.04
DONNER 10: 909, 916, 1018-24
HARMON 6: 25

Hoffer v. Microsoft Corp., 405 F.3d 1326, 74 USPQ2d 1481 (Fed. Cir. 2005) 2111.04
HARMON 6: 112; 19: 511

Minton v. Natl. Ass’n. of Securities Dealers, 336 F.3d 1373, 67 USPQ2d 1614 (Fed. Cir. 2003)  2106,  2111.04,  2133.03(c)
HARMON 2: 215; 19: 373

rexnord, cvi

custom search

REVERSED 
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1715 Ex Parte Erlat et al 12642501 - (D) COLAIANNI 103 GE Licensing TALBOT, BRIAN K

1714 Ex Parte Kudela et al 12172029 - (D) BEST 103 PATTERSON & SHERIDAN, LLP - - APPM/TX BRATLAND JR, KENNETH A

Claim 9 requires, among other things, a metal gas feed tube that has “a first end coupled with the gas source.” Because a claim term should be construed consistently wherever it appears in a patent or application’s claims, see, e.g., Rexnord Corp. v. Laitram Corp., 274 F.3d 1336, 1342 (Fed. Cir. 2001); CVI/Beta Ventures, Inc. v. Tura LP, 112 F.3d 1146, 1159 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (“[W]e are obliged to construe the term ‘elasticity’ consistently throughout the claims.”), we determine that the term “coupled” as used in the ’029 application’s claims means “joined” or “connected.”

The ’029 application’s independent claims use the phrase “directly coupled.” Based on our review of the ’029 application’s Specification, we conclude that a person of ordinary skill in the art would have understood the adverb “directly” as having been used in its normal sense of meaning “in immediate physical contact.” See Directly, MERRIAM-WEBSTER.COM, http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/directly (last visited Dec. 17, 2013).

Accordingly, we construe the phrase “directly coupled” as meaning “joined by immediate physical contact.”

Rexnord Corp. v. Laitram Corp., 274 F.3d 1336, 60 USPQ2d 1851 (Fed. Cir. 2001) 2111.01
DONNER 1: 308; 2: 570, 571; 3: 470, 493; 10: 100
HARMON 6: 90

CVI HARMON 6: 123, 174, 199; 19: 358

1733 Ex Parte Cho et al 12051371 - (D) NAGUMO 103 VOLPE AND KOENIG, P.C. YANG, JIE

1789 Ex Parte Conley et al 12074166 - (D) PAK 103/obviousness-type double patenting E I DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY MATZEK, MATTHEW D

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2838 Ex Parte Benes 11952276 - (D) PER CURIAM 103 Agilent Technologies, Inc. in care of: CPA Global GRUBB, MATTHEW

2857 Ex Parte Henry et al 12044754 - (D) DELMENDO 103 INVENSYS SYSTEMS, INC. WEST, JEFFREY R

2884 Ex Parte Vaquero et al 12239331 - (D) GARRIS 103 EPSTEIN & GERKEN LEE, SHUN K

AFFIRMED-IN-PART 
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1712 Ex Parte Propst 12860391 - (D) HANLON 102/103 112(2)/102/103 Novak Druce Connolly Bove + Quigg LLP PENNY, TABATHA L

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2887 Ex Parte BUNGERT et al 11627056 - (D) NEW 102 103 37 CFR § 41.50(b) 103 HAMRE, SCHUMANN, MUELLER & LARSON, P.C. KIM, TAE W

AFFIRMED 
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1711 Ex Parte Beatty et al 12210729 - (D) COLAIANNI 102/103 JOHNSON & JOHNSON DUNLAP, CAITLIN NOELLE DENNI

1732 Ex Parte Bull et al 12612142 - (D) COLAIANNI 103 BASF CORPORATION DAVIS, SHENG HAN

1756 Ex Parte Khang 12071453 - (D) OWENS 103 HARNESS, DICKEY & PIERCE, P.L.C. BRAYTON, JOHN JOSEPH

1773 Ex Parte PIERIK et al 12625803 - (D) COLAIANNI 103 PHILIPS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY & STANDARDS KINGAN, TIMOTHY G

1782 Ex Parte Denome et al 12270547 - (D) LEBOVITZ 103 THE PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY YAGER, JAMES C

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2158 Ex Parte Marndi et al 11491753 - (D) FISHMAN 102 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY CORBO, GRISELLE

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2457 Ex Parte Strassner 12236609 - (D) HUME 103 IBM CORP. (WIP) c/o WALDER INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW, P.C. RUBIN,BLAKE J

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2847 Ex Parte Ichiyama 11812833 - (D) FRANKLIN 103 FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, GARRETT & DUNNER LLP CHEN, XIAOLIANG

2871 Ex Parte Sakuma 11979508 - (D) FRAHM 103 MORGAN LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP (WA) KIM, DENNIS Y

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3691 Ex Parte Melling et al 10923606 - (D) LORIN 101/112(2)/103 PERKINS COIE LLP - SEA General CAMPBELL, KELLIE L

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3715 Ex Parte Hurling 11633808 - (D) CAPP 101/103 UNILEVER PATENT GROUP UTAMA, ROBERT J

REEXAMINATION

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
2747 ACACIA PATENT ACQUISITION LLC Patent Owner and Appellant 90011295 6115698 08/516,646 HOFF 102 102/103 PROCOPIO, CORY, HARGREAVES & SAVITCH LLP THIRD PARTY REQUESTER: FISH & RICHARDSON, P.C. CARLSON, JEFFREY D original THOMAS, JOSEPH

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2161 ACACIA PATENT ACQUISITION LLC Patent Owner and Appellant 90011296 6473744 09/369,517 HOFF 112(2)/102 "PROCOPIO, CORY, HARGREAVES & SAVITCH LLP THIRD PARTY REQUESTER: FISH & RICHARDSON, P.C. CARLSON, JEFFREY D original COSIMANO, EDWARD R

AFFIRMED 
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2191 GOOGLE, INC. Requester and Respondent v. ORACLE AMERICA, INC. Patent Owner and Appellant 95001560 7426720 10/745,023 DILLON 102/103 MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP STEELMAN, MARY J original WU, JUNCHUN

REHEARING

GRANTED
2711 Ex parte TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT AND LICENSING, LLC Appellant and Patent Owner 90009400 RE 35952 08/116,019 90/010,726 90/009,400 90/009,456 SIU 102 "NIRO, SCAVONE, HALLER & NIRO THIRD PARTY REQUESTERS: MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP; WILDMAN HARROLD ALLEN & DIXON LLP POKRZYWA, JOSEPH R

FEDERAL CIRCUIT

DISMISSED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, VACATED IN PART, AND REMANDED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1633 1636 INSTITUT PASTEUR & UNIVERSITE PIERRE ET MARIE CURIE, Appellant, v. MARGARET A. FOCARINO, Commissioner for Patents, Appellee, AND PRECISION BIOSCIENCES, INC., Appellee. 2012-1487 95/000,491 7,309,605 10/820,843 6,610,545 09/836,169 6,833,252 09/492,697 TARANTO 103 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP; Associate Solicitor USPTO KAUSHAL, SUMESH; PATTERSON, CHARLES L JR

the blogger search function has been broken for months, google knows this, to search for names (ie examiner's name or a company) use custom search (google cse) below.  to search for cases use tabs above

custom search

REVERSED 
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1725 Ex Parte AlexandrovichSerov et al 11491012 - (D) OWENS 103 CHRISTIE, PARKER & HALE, LLP CULLEN, SEAN P

1774 Ex Parte Miller et al 11821485 - (D) FRANKLIN 112(2)/102/103 Renner, Kenner, Greive, Bobak, Taylor & Weber COOLEY, CHARLES E

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2189 Ex Parte Halstead et al 11268158 - (D) HUGHES 102 Muirhead and Saturnelli, LLC LOONAN, ERICT

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2853 Ex Parte Rannow et al 11589615 - (D) FRANKLIN 102/103 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY AL HASHIMI, SARAH

2875 Ex Parte Blake 11767562 - (D) GARRIS 102/103 Vista IP Law Group LLP HAN, JASON
REVERSED 2892 Ex Parte Frerichs et al 10524672 - (D) FRANKLIN 102/103 Muncy, Geissler, Olds & Lowe, PLLC GORDON, MATTHEW E

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3633 Ex Parte Leopolder et al 11570710 - (D) SMEGAL 102/103 RENNER, OTTO, BOISSELLE & SKLAR, LLP HIJAZ, OMARF

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1629 Ex Parte Britigan et al 11004049 - (D) MITCHELL 112(2)/103 102/obviousness-type double patenting FULBRIGHT & JAWORSKI LLP TOWNSLEY, SARA ELIZABETH

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2828 Ex Parte Hunter et al 11716002 - (D) WARREN 103 103 Akonia Holographics GOLUB-MILLER, MARCIA A

2844 Ex Parte Saccomanno 11350953 - (D) FRAHM 103 102/103 HONEYWELL/IFL VU, JIMMY T
AFFIRMED 2439 Ex Parte Bloemeke et al 11014312 - (D) SAADAT 101/102/103 Yudell Isidore Ng Russell PLLC LE, CANH

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1731 Ex Parte Hollman et al 11931415 - (D) COLAIANNI 102 Sun Chemical Corporation, c/o Frost Brown Todd LLC ABU ALI, SHUANGYI

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2158 Ex Parte Friedman et al 11358331 - (D) SAADAT 112(2) HOFFMAN WARNICK LLC RUIZ, ANGELICA

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2463 Ex Parte Brost et al 11627821 - (D) KOHUT 103 AT&T Legal Department - HFZ MARCELO, MELVIN C

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2648 Ex Parte Desai et al 11387309 - (D) BUI 103 THOMAS | HORSTEMEYER, LLP (Broadcom) PEREZ, ANGELICA

2666 Ex Parte Johnson 11328033 - (D) SAADAT 102 JENNIFER L. BALES SETH, MANAV

2669 Ex Parte Lee 11253831 - (D) PER CURIAM 103 THE FARRELL LAW FIRM, P.C. YEH, EUENG NAN

2695 Ex Parte Nakamura 11570721 - (D) MANTIS MERCADER 102 SNELL & WILMER L.L.P. (Panasonic) SASINOWSKI, ANDREW

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2833 Ex Parte Eble et al 11291245 - (D) GARRIS 102/103 SCHWEGMAN, LUNDBERG & WOESSNER/SAP KAYES, SEAN PHILLIP

2882 Ex Parte Troost et al 11580134 - (D) PRAISS 103 STERNE, KESSLER, GOLDSTEIN & FOX P.L.L.C. WHITESELL GORDON, STEVEN H

2884 Ex Parte Zelakiewicz et al 10955409 - (D) SMITH 103 GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY (PCPI) C/O FLETCHER YODER TANINGCO, MARCUS H

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3665 Ex Parte Jung et al 11333850 - (D) REIMERS 103 THE FARRELL LAW FIRM, P.C. KIM, KYUNG J

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3728 Ex Parte Brandt 11047097 - (D) BUNTING 103 THE PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY GEHMAN, BRYON P

REEXAMINATION

REVERSED 
Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3612 FORD GLOBAL TECHNOLOGIES LLC Respondent, Requestor v. GM GLOBAL TECHNOLOGY OPERATIONS LLC Appellant, Patent Owner 95001859 7290831 11/399,252 McCARTHY 102/103 GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION ENGLISH, PETER C original PATEL, KIRAN B

translogic, hyatt2

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1775 Ex Parte Datta et al 12561116 - (D) COLAIANNI 103 CARDINAL LAW GROUP HURST, JONATHAN M

1793 Ex Parte Hellweg et al 12389570 - (D) OWENS 103 GENERAL MILLS, INC. TRAN, LIEN THUY

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2161 Ex Parte Parees et al 11858937 - (D) SMITH 103 IBM CORP. (WSM) c/o WINSTEAD P.C. LU, CHARLES EDWARD

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2885 Ex Parte Hsiao et al 12046419 - (D) HASTINGS 103 JIANQ CHYUN INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OFFICE BANNAN, JULIE A

"[D]uring examination proceedings, claims are given their broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification." In re Translogic Tech., Inc., 504 F.3d 1249, 1256 (Fed. Cir. 2007), quoting In re Hyatt, 211 F.3d 1367, 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2000).

Translogic Technology Inc., In re, 504 F.3d 1249, 84 USPQ2d 1929 (Fed. Cir. 2007) 2286, 2686.04

Hyatt, In re, 211 F.3d 1367, 54 USPQ2d 1664 (Fed. Cir. 2000) 2111

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1777 Ex Parte Toal et al 12442160 - (D) HANLON 103 103 DIEDERIKS & WHITELAW, PLC HIXSON, CHRISTOPHER

AFFIRMED 
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1716 Ex Parte White et al 12406407 - (D) BEST 103 PATTERSON & SHERIDAN, LLP - - APPM/TX CHEN, KEATH T

1773 Ex Parte Wardlaw 12774445 - (D) PER CURIAM 103 O'Shea Getz P.C. HAMMOND, CHARLES

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2167 Ex Parte Beuch et al 10965124 - (D) HUGHES 102/103 WOOD, HERRON & EVANS, L.L.P. (IBM) LIU, HEXING

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2645 Ex Parte Octaviano et al 11436800 - (D) FRAHM 102/103 LENOVO COMPANY (LENOVO-BKLS) c/o Biggers Kennedy Lenart Spraggins LLP TORRES, MARCOS L

2671 Ex Parte Hains 11727506 - (D) JENKS 103 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(B) 103 OLIFF & BERRIDGE, PLC KAU, STEVEN Y

2699 Ex Parte KIM et al 11949467 - (D) KRIVAK 102 THE FARRELL LAW FIRM, P.C. BALAOING, ARIEL A

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2837 Ex Parte Godbey 11518682 - (D) PER CURIAM 103 ABB Inc. HINSON, RONALD

REHEARING

DENIED
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2167 Ex Parte Ramacher et al 10936468 - (D) DILLON 103 Vista IP Law Group, LLP (Oracle) WILSON, KIMBERLY LOVEL

REEXAMINATION

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2851 Ex parte Chapman/Leonard Studio Equipment, Inc. 90012067 6520642 09/695,741 PER CURIUM 103 103 PERKINS COIE LLP - LOS General ENGLISH, PETER C original NGUYEN, MICHELLE P

AFFIRMED 
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2186 SANDISK CORPORATION Requester and Respondent v. NETAC TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD. Patent Owner and Appellant 95000384 6,829,672 09/687,869 BLANKENSHIP 103 Troutman Sanders LLP Third Party Requester: BAKER BOTTS L.L.P. REICHLE, KARIN M original LI, ZHUO H

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2448 YOUTUBE, LLC and GOOGLE INC. Requester v. PRAGMATUS AV LLC Patent Owner 95001649 7822813 11/668,625 DILLON 103 Reed Smith LLP Third Party Requester: STERNE,  KESSLER, GOLDSTEIN & FOX P.L.L.C. CAMPBELL, JOSHUA D original STRANGE, AARON N

petering, bristol-myers, monolithic, rambus

the blogger search function has been broken for months, google knows this, to search for names (ie examiner's name or a company) use custom search (google cse) below, to search for cases use tabs above

custom search

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2183 Ex Parte Archambault et al 11250057 - (D) WINSOR 103 IBM AUS IPLAW (GLF) c/o Garg Law Firm, PLLC GIROUX, GEORGE

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2658 Ex Parte Edgington et al 11262482 - (D) KOHUT 102/103 Sunstein Kann Murphy & Timbers LLP GODBOLD, DOUGLAS

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3632 Ex Parte Maciejewski 11903150 - (D) CAPP 103 SIEMENS CORPORATION MCDUFFIE, MICHAEL D

In a proper case, the disclosure of a genus may anticipate a species within that genus even if the species is not recited. See In re Petering, 301 F.2d 676, 682 (CCPA 1962); Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Ben Venue Labs, Inc., 246 F.3d 1368, 1380 (Fed. Cir. 2001).

Petering, In re, 301 F.2d 676, 133 USPQ 275 (CCPA 1962) 2131.02, 2131.03, 2144.08

bristol-myers HARMON 3: 4, 23, 44, 53, 59, 71, 89; 6: 339
DONNER 1: 415; 7: 748, 911; 8: 789; 10: 891

FEDERAL CIRCUIT

VACATED

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2827 2818 KILOPASS TECHNOLOGY, INC., Plaintiff-Appellee, v. SIDENSE CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellant. 2013-1193 6,940,751 10/765,802 6,777,757 10/133,704 6,856,540 10/448,505 O’MALLEY Concurring RADER 285 attorney's fees Durie Tangri, LLP; Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton, LLP original PERKINS COIE LLP - SEA General AUDUONG, GENE NGHIA; HO, TU TU V

And, we recently reiterated that “‘[l]itigation misconduct and unprofessional behavior may suffice, by themselves, to make a case exceptional under § 285.’” Monolithic Power Sys., Inc. v. O2 Micro Int’l Ltd., 726 F.3d 1359, 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2013) (alteration in original) (quoting Rambus, Inc. v. Infineon Techs. AG, 318 F.3d 1081, 1106 (Fed. Cir. 2003)).

rambus HARMON 6: 162; 14: 278; 17: 184
DONNER 3: 535

gardiner, schreiber

custom search

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2444 Ex Parte Muller et al 11839857 - (D) WHITEHEAD, JR. 102/103 CAREY, RODRIGUEZ, GREENBERG & O'KEEFE, LLP PAPPAS, PETER

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3626 Ex Parte Wager et al 10679836 - (D) KIM 103 SHOOK, HARDY & BACON L.L.P. RAJ, RAJIV J

3633 Ex Parte Torres 12290754 - (D) BUNTING 103 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 103 AQUATIC CO. C/O TOMKINS Limited, IP LAW DEPT. 10-A3 KENNY, DANIEL J

See In re Gardiner, 171 F.2d 313, 315-16 (CCPA 1948) (“the patentability of apparatus claims must be shown in the structure claimed and not merely upon a use, function, or result thereof”). See also In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d 1473, 1477 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (affirming rejection of appellant’s claim directed to a dispensing top for dispensing popcorn based on factual finding that the prior art structure would be capable of dispensing popcorn).

Schreiber, In re, 128 F.3d 1473, 44 USPQ2d 1429 (Fed. Cir. 1997) 2111.02, 2112, 2114
DONNER 7: 736, 758, 938-40
HARMON 3: 21, 87, 98; 4: 229; 19: 419

REEXAMINATION

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2411 Olympic Developments AG, LLC Patent Owner and Appellant 90011791 5,475,585 08/191,143 LEBOVITZ 103 103 Hershkovitz & Associates, PLLC KE, PENG original MCELHENY JR, DONALD E

REHEARING

DENIED
Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2455 FACEBOOK, INC. Requester v. FRANK M. WEYER and TROY K. JAVAHER Patent Owners 95001411 7,644,122 11/623,132 COCKS TECHCOASTLAW THIRD PARTY REQUESTER: HEIDI KEEFE, COOLEY LLP TON, MY TRANG original ISMAIL, SHAWKI SAIF

boehringer

custom search 
REVERSED 
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2166 Ex Parte Olschafskie et al 11220484 - (D) MORGAN 103 Sunstein Kann Murphy & Timbers LLP YEN, SYLING

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2647 Ex Parte Srinivasan et al 11432074 - (D) HUGHES 103 KENYON & KENYON LLP HANIDU, GANIYU A

3631 Ex Parte LINDGREN et al 12266914 - (D) SPAHN 103 WHIRLPOOL CORPORATION - MD 3601 HAWN, PATRICK D

3657 Ex Parte Bertolotti et al 11484941 - (D) HOSKINS 102/103 CARLSON, GASKEY & OLDS, P.C. MOMPER, ANNA M

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3781 Ex Parte Konefal et al 11443329 - (D) CALVE 103 REISING, ETHINGTON, BARNES, KISSELLE, P.C. SMALLEY, JAMES N

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2171 Ex Parte Bump et al 11403226 - (D) SHIANG 102 102/103 INVENSYS SYSTEMS, INC. ALVESTEFFER, STEPHEN D

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3748 Ex Parte Gonze et al 11876121 - (D) MORRISON 103 103 Harness Dickey & Pierce, P.L.C. BOGUE, JESSE SAMUEL

AFFIRMED 
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1788 Ex Parte Laoutid et al 11658016 - (D) NAGUMO 103 ANTONELLI, TERRY, STOUT & KRAUS, LLP VO, HAI

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2128 Ex Parte El-Wardany et al 12603629 - (D) DANG 103 CARLSON, GASKEY & OLDS/PRATT & WHITNEY c/o CPA Global MOLL, NITHYA JANAKIRAMAN

2168 Ex Parte Conboy et al 11114796 - (D) WHITEHEAD, JR. 103 IBM Lotus & Rational SW c/o Schmeiser, Olsen & Watts LLP EHICHIOYA, IRETE FRED

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2624 Ex Parte SINGH et al 11425623 - (D) WHITEHEAD, JR. 103 SCENERA RESEARCH, LLC WOO, KUO-KONG

2648 Ex Parte Khayrallah 11517533 - (D) DANG 102/103 COATS & BENNETT, PLLC TSVEY, GENNADIY

We conclude such “to receive” language to merely represents a statement of intended use of the antenna, which does not limit the claim. Particularly, an intended use will not limit the scope of the claim because it merely defines a context in which the invention operates. Boehringer Ingelheim Vetmedica, Inc. v. Schering-Plough Corp., 320 F.3d 1339, 1345 (Fed. Cir. 2003).

DONNER 8: 1073
HARMON 6: 84, 347

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3775 Ex Parte Maughan et al 11116051 - (D) JAMES T. MOORE 102/103 Fay Kaplun & Marcin, LLP YANG, ANDREW

REHEARING

DENIED 
Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2444 Ex Parte Goldhor et al 10664616 - (D) SAADAT 103 MICHAEL B. EINSCHLAG, ESQ. CLOUD, JOIYA M

REEXAMINATION

AFFIRMED 
Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2455 Ex parte BROCADE COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS, INC. 90011765 7584301 10/839,919 MARTIN 102 Novak Druce + Quigg LLP For Third-Party Requester: Finnegan Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, L.L.P. DESAI,RACHNA SINGH original WON, MICHAEL YOUNG

boon, bozek

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2493 Ex Parte Agarwal et al 12015160 - (D) MANTIS MERCADER 103 GIBB & RILEY, LLC SHAW, PETER C

AFFIRMED-IN-PART 
3715 Ex Parte Alsaud 11502710 - (D) MORRISON 102 102 Wolff & Samson PC CARLOS, ALVIN LEABRES

AFFIRMED 
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1786 Ex Parte Fay 11489177 - (D) COLAIANNI 103 JOHNS MANVILLE SYKES, ALTREV C

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2194 Ex Parte Sen et al 11336231 - (D) WHITEHEAD, JR. 103 CAREY, RODRIGUEZ, GREENBERG & O'KEEFE, LLP JORDAN, KIMBERLY L

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2444 Ex Parte Barrus et al 10816602 - (D) LORIN 103 CAREY, RODRIGUEZ, GREENBERG & O'KEEFE, LLP CHRISTENSEN, SCOTT B

“Having established that this knowledge was in the art, the [E]xaminer could then properly rely . . . on a conclusion of obviousness ‘from common knowledge and common sense of the person of ordinary skill in the art without any specific hint or suggestion in a particular reference.’” In re Bozek, 416 F.2d 1385, 1390 (CCPA 1969). It is the Appellants’ burden to traverse the Examiner’s notice. “We did not mean to imply . . . that a bald challenge, with nothing more, would be all that was needed. . . .We feel it to be perfectly consistent with the principles governing procedural due process to require that a challenge to judicial notice by the board contain adequate information or argument so that on its face it creates a reasonable doubt regarding the circumstances justifying the judicial notice.” In re Boon, 439 F.2d 724, 728 (CCPA 1971). That has not been done here by the bald assertion that “the Examiner has erred in taking Official Notice without any substantial evidence” (App. Br. 15).

bozek DONNER 8: 339

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3726 Ex Parte Behr et al 10573273 - (D) IPPOLITO 103 PATENT CENTRAL LLC TAOUSAKIS, ALEXANDER P

mewherter

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2171 Ex Parte Bump et al 11244860 - (D) SHIANG 102/103 37 C.F.R.  § 41.50(b) 101 INVENSYS SYSTEMS, INC. , IP DEPARTMENT ALVESTEFFER, STEPHEN D

Because under Mewherter, the broadest reasonable interpretation of the term computer-readable medium encompasses signals per se, claims 15-20 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as covering non-statutory subject matter.

We note that Appellants are not preculded from amending the claims to overcome the rejection.  Relevant guidance is in U.S. Patent & Trademark Office, Subject Matter Eligibility of Computer Readable Media, 1351 Off. Gaz. Pat. Office 212 (Feb. 23, 2010) (A claim drawn to such a computer readable medium that covers both transitory and non-transitory embodiments may be amended to narrow the claim to cover only statutory embodiments to avoid a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 101 by adding the limitation non-transitory to the claim.); U.S. Patent & Trademank Office, Evaluating Subject Matter Eligibility Under 35 USC 101 (August 2012 Update) (pp. 11-14), available at http://www.uspto.gov/patents/law/exam/101_training_aug2012.pdf (nothing that while non-transitory is a viable option for overcoming the presumption that the media encompasses signals or carrier waves, merely indicating that such media are physical or tangible will not overcome such presumption)/  See. id. at 14.

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2491 Ex Parte Ratakonda et al 11480351 - (D) NAPPI 103 RYAN, MASON & LEWIS, LLP COLLINS, JOSHUA L

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2859 Ex Parte Takatsuji et al 11769425 - (D) KIMLIN 103 ALLEMAN HALL MCCOY RUSSELL & TUTTLE LLP BOATENG, ALEXIS ASIEDUA

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2444 Ex Parte McCanne et al 10618369 - (D) RUGGIERO 102 101 HICKMAN PALERMO TRUONG BECKER BINGHAM WONG/Yahoo! CLOUD, JOIYA M

2455 Ex Parte O’SULLIVAN et al 11934849 - (D) BAHR 102 101/103 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 103 CAREY, RODRIGUEZ, GREENBERG & O'KEEFE, LLP ASHRAF, WASEEM

2478 Ex Parte Hind et al 11948370 - (D) STEPHENS 103 101 Cuenot, Forsythe & Kim, LLC KHAJURIA, SHRIPAL K

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1791 Ex Parte Sekikawa et al 12447976 - (D) 103 CURATOLO SIDOTI CO., LPA DUBOIS, PHILIP A

1791 Ex Parte Sosebee 11823423 - (D) KIMLIN 112(1)/112(2)/103 AMIN TALATI, LLC WATTS, JENNA A

1791 Ex Parte Haedelt et al 11913025 - (D) KIMLIN 103 K&L Gates LLP BEKKER, KELLY JO

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2159 Ex Parte Curtis 11961679 - (D) STEPHENS 103 Concert Technology Corporation MAMILLAPALLI, PAVAN

2168 Ex Parte Kirk et al 11646610 - (D) WHITEHEAD, JR. 102/103 Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C. MENG, JAU SHYA

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2436 Ex Parte Jeong 11765721 - (D) KRIVAK 103 THE FARRELL LAW FIRM, P.C. HOANG, DANIEL L

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2644 Ex Parte Buris et al 11614230 - (D) DIXON 103 MOTOROLA SOLUTIONS, INC. EDOUARD, PATRICK NESTOR

REEXAMINATION

AFFIRMED-IN-PART 
Tech Center 2600 Communications
2629 UNIVERSAL ELECTRONICS, INC. v. LOGITECH, INC. 95001760 7821504 12/797,686 HOFF 102/103 112(1)/112(2) GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP (CHI) RALIS, STEPHEN J original ABDULSELAM, ABBAS I