interconnect

custom search

REVERSED 
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1729 Ex Parte Saloka et al 12099221 - (D) OWENS 103 BROOKS KUSHMAN P.C./FGTL EGGERDING, ALIX ECHELMEYER

1745 Ex Parte De Luca 10532525 - (D) OWENS 102/103 Sealed Air Corporation WU, VICKI H

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3633 Ex Parte LaCrosse 11109652 - (D) GERSTENBLITH 103 WELSH FLAXMAN & GITLER LLC FIGUEROA, LUZ ADRIANA

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3711 Ex Parte Talafous 10912205 - (D) GERSTENBLITH 103 GRAY, PLANT, MOOTY, MOOTY & BENNETT, P.A. NGUYEN, KIEN T

“When prior art references require selective combination by the court to render obvious a subsequent invention, there must be some reason for the combination other than the hindsight gleaned from the invention itself.” Interconnect Planning Corp. v. Feil, 774 F.2d 1132, 1143 (Fed. Cir. 1985).
DONNER 8: 424
HARMON 4: 18, 41, 42, 123, 157, 304; 11: 153, 194; 18: 301; 19: 162, 209; 21: 210, 219, 220, 222, 266, 365

AFFIRMED-IN-PART 
Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2881 Ex Parte Giles et al 11722970 - (D) COLAIANNI 103 103 Waters Technologies Corporation IPPOLITO, NICOLE MARIE

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1727 Ex Parte Koenekamp et al 11368307 - (D) OWENS 103 GENERAL MOTORS LLC HAN, KWANG S

1788 Ex Parte Mabey 12317715 - (D) OWENS 103 CHRISTOPHER JOHN RUDY CHANG, VICTORS

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2173 Ex Parte Funabashi et al 11812561 - (D) JENKS 103 RADER FISHMAN & GRAUER PLLC SHIH, HAOSHIAN

2194 Ex Parte Garza et al 11531726 - (D) DANG 103 Jordan IP Law (IBM-RSW) YUN, CARINA

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2427 Ex Parte Maissel et al 12317081 - (D) SMITH 103 Husch Blackwell Sanders LLP Welsh & Katz HUERTA, ALEXANDER Q

2468 Ex Parte An 11121204 - (D) DANG 102/103 SUGHRUE MION, PLLC PHUNG, LUAT

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2648 Ex Parte Desai et al 11143378 - (D) CURCURI 103 THOMAS | HORSTEMEYER, LLP (Broadcom) HSIEH, PING Y

FEDERAL CIRCUIT

AFFIRMED-IN-PART AND REVERSED-IN-PART 
Tech Center 2600 Communications
2616 CISCO SYSTEMS, INC., Appellant, v. MICHELLE K. LEE, Deputy Director, United States Patent and Trademark Office, Appellee, v. TELES AG INFORMATIONSTECHNOLOGIEN, Cross-Appellant. 2012-1513, -1514 95/001,001 7,145,902 11/165,280 WALLACH 102/103 102/103 Goodwin Procter LLP; Associate Solicitor USPTO; Foley & Lardner LLP original NOVAK DRUCE CONNOLLY BOVE + QUIGG LLP QURESHI, AFSAR M

PANEL DECISION REINSTATED
LIGHTING BALLAST CONTROL LLC, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. PHILIPS ELECTRONICS NORTH AMERICA CORPORATION, Defendant, AND UNIVERSAL LIGHTING TECHNOLOGIES, INC., Defendant-Appellant. 2012-1014 NEWMAN concurring LOURIE dissenting O’MALLEY, RADER, REYNA, WALLACH de novo review of claim construction ANDREW J. DHUEY; Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP;

VACATED AND REMANDED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1714 FRANS NOOREN AFDICHTINGSSYSTEMEN B.V., AND STOPAQ B.V., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. STOPAQ AMCORR INC., doing business as Amcorr Products and Services, AND DOLPHIN SEALANTS, LLC, Defendants-Appellees. 2013-1200 5,898,044 08/672,670 TARANTO summary judgment of non-infringement, claim construction Jones Day; Winston & Strawn LLP SZEKELY, PETER A

boehringer, thorner, vivid

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1727 Ex Parte Alp et al 11928608 - (D) SMITH 103 MILLER IP GROUP, PLC GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION BEST, ZACHARY P

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2426 Ex Parte Zato et al 11588934 - (D) SHIANG 112(1)/102 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY PENG, HSIUNGFEI

2443 Ex Parte Kumaran et al 12342732 - (D) STEPHENS 103 Baker Botts L.L.P. BELANI, KISHIN G

2488 Ex Parte MacInnis 10850911 - (D) DESHPANDE 102/103 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 103 THOMAS | HORSTEMEYER, LLP (Broadcom) PE, GEEPY

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2897 Ex Parte PAL et al 12209056 - (D) GARRIS 102/103 Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. c/o Davidson Sheehan LLP NEWTON, VALERIE N

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 2600 Communications
2625 Ex Parte Ohta 11495595 - (D) NAPPI 103 112(1) NIXON & VANDERHYE, P.C. SHAPIRO, LEONID

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2158 Ex Parte Kinkade et al 11457656 - (D) CURCURI 103 MITCH HARRIS, LLC - GENERAL PENG, HUAWEN A

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2424 Ex Parte Gaydos et al 11497639 - (D) RUGGIERO 103 PHILIP H. BURRUS, IV SHELEHEDA, JAMES R

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2631 Ex Parte Kent et al 11173502 - (D) WHITEHEAD, JR. 103 STERNE, KESSLER, GOLDSTEIN & FOX P.L.L.C. PATEL, DHAVAL V

2682 Ex Parte Abraham et al 12019088 - (D) DANG 103 HITT GAINES, PC ALCATEL-LUCENT NGUYEN, NAM V

We find such “configured to” language merely represents a statement of intended use of the RFID readers comprised in the network, which does not limit the claim. Additionally, we find the recited “to be deployed” language merely represents a statement of intended use of the equipment, which does not limit the claim (Claim 1). 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). Thus, we give claim 1 its broadest reasonable interpretation as merely requiring RFID readers capable of reading tag identifiers relating to equipment capable of being deployed in a group of fixed locations.

HARMON 6: 84, 347
DONNER 8: 482; 10: 910-18

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2884 Ex Parte Spartiotis et al 10420834 - (D) PER CURIAM 103 HARNESS, DICKEY & PIERCE, P.L.C. LEE, SHUN K

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3655 Ex Parte Baldwin 12210231 - (D) IPPOLITO 102 MACMILLAN, SOBANSKI & TODD, LLC - FORD HLAVKA, DAVID J

We are also not apprised of Examiner error by Appellant’s argument that the Specification defines “driveably connected” to mean “directly connected.” Our reviewing court has instructed that “[t]o act as its own lexicographer, a patentee must clearly set forth a definition of the disputed claim term other than its plain and ordinary meaning.” Thorner v. Sony Computer Entertainment America LLC, 669 F.3d 1362, 1365-66 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (citations and quotations omitted). Appellant has not pointed to, and we do not see, where the Specification clearly sets forth that “driveably connected” means something other than its plain and ordinary meaning.

3688 Ex Parte Schrewelius 11774624 - (D) FISCHETTI 112(2)/103 RENNER, OTTO, BOISSELLE & SKLAR, LLP VIG, NARESH

REHEARING

DENIED
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2183 Ex Parte Lataille et al 11526870 - (R) PER CURIAM 102/103 NIXON & VANDERHYE, PC PARTRIDGE, WILLIAM B

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2427 Ex Parte Sandoval 11257098 - (D) DILLON 102 Great Lakes Intellectual Property, PLLC /CableLabs ALATA, YASSIN

2497 Ex Parte Britton et al 11359212 - (D) KUMAR 102 CAREY, RODRIGUEZ, GREENBERG & O'KEEFE, LLP PARTHASARATHY, PRAMILA

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3635 Ex Parte Shockey et al 12139377 - (R) TARTAL 103 Parsons Behle & Latimer PAINTER,BRANON C

Thus, “faux finish” is accorded its ordinary and customary meaning, and no express definition of “faux finish” is necessary to conclude that Appellants failed to overcome the Examiner’s determination that Cymbala discloses the structure as claimed. Cf. Vivid Technologies, Inc. v. Am. Sci. & Eng’g, Inc., 200 F.3d 795, 803 (Fed. Cir. 1999) (“only those terms need be construed that are in controversy, and only to the extent necessary to resolve the controversy.”)

HARMON 6: 47, 99, 298; 10: 341, 345; 11: 45, 115, 128, 141, 145, 146; 20: 352, 356
DONNER 10: 1162

FEDERAL CIRCUIT

REVERSED-IN-PART, AFFIRMED-IN-PART, AND REMANDED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1615 TAKEDA PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANY LIMITED, TAKEDA PHARMACEUTICALS NORTH AMERICA, INC., TAKEDA PHARMACEUTICALS, LLC, TAKEDA PHARMACEUTICALS AMERICA, INC., AND ETHYPHARM, S.A., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. ZYDUS PHARMACEUTICALS USA, INC. AND CADILA HEALTHCARE LIMITED, Defendants-Appellants. 2013-1406 6328994 09/355,781 PROST literal infringement no invalidity Hogan Lovells US LLP; Kelley Drye & Warren, LLP TRAN, SUSAN T

REVERSED AND REMANDED
3502 RING & PINION SERVICE INC., Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ARB CORPORATION LTD., Defendant-Appellant. 2013-1238 5591098 08/386,269 MOORE granting SJ non-infringement, claim vitiation remand with instructions to grant SJ of infringement under doctrine of equivalents Lowe Graham Jones, PLLC; Davis Wright Tremaine LLP RODRIGUEZ, SAUL

electromed, superguide, phillips

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1742 Ex Parte Anghileri et al 12282795 - (D) SMITH 103 Pearne & Gordon LLP SCHIFFMAN, BENJAMIN A

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2157 Ex Parte Turpin et al 10762866 - (D) FREDMAN 103 ALG INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, LLC TIMBLIN, ROBERT M

2192 Ex Parte Schumacher 10941725 - (D) DIXON 102/103 DYKEMA GOSSETT PLLC DAO, THUY CHAN

2198 Ex Parte Denissen 10892273 - (D) DANG 103 Wolff & Samson (ALU) TECKLU, ISAAC TUKU

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2452 Ex Parte Zilliacus et al 10777284 - (D) BROWNE 103 BANNER & WITCOFF, LTD. DOAN, DUYEN MY

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2848 Ex Parte Locker et al 12263184 - (D) KIMLIN 103 ROGITZ & ASSOCIATES WU, JERRY

2872 Ex Parte Endo et al 11467399 - (D) THOMAS 103 OBLON, SPIVAK, MCCLELLAND MAIER & NEUSTADT, L.L.P. CHWASZ, JADE R

2885 Ex Parte Crowder 11259978 - (D) KIMLIN 102/103 Maynard Cooper & Gale, PC LEE, JONG SUK

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3752 Ex Parte Peltola et al 10568792 - (D) ASTORINO 103 SEYFARTH SHAW LLP CERNOCH, STEVEN MICHAEL

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2156 Ex Parte Murthy et al 11184301 - (D) FREDMAN 103 103 HICKMAN PALERMO TRUONG BECKER BINGHAM WONG/ORACLE VO, TRUONG V

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2649 Ex Parte Moloudi 11005837 - (D) NAPPI 103 103 STERNE, KESSLER, GOLDSTEIN & FOX P.L.L.C. MILORD, MARCEAU

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2887 Ex Parte Herwig et al 11834773 - (D) WARREN 103 103 NCR Corporation VO, TUYEN KIM

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1713 Ex Parte Bayer et al 11478004 - (D) KIMLIN 103 CABOT MICROELECTRONICS CORPORATION ALANKO, ANITA KAREN

1789 Ex Parte Chen 11742104 - (D) SMITH 103 DICKINSON WRIGHT PLLC COLE, ELIZABETH M

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2156 Ex Parte Yochai 11726831 - (D) HUME 103 MUIRHEAD AND SATURNELLI, LLC NGUYEN, LOAN T

Though understanding the claim language may be aided by the explanations contained in the written description, it is important not to import into a claim limitations that are not a part of the claim. For example, a particular embodiment appearing in the written description may not be read into a claim when the claim language is broader than the embodiment.

SuperGuide Corp. v. DirecTV Enters, Inc., 358 F.3d 870, 875 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (citing Electro Med. Sys. S.A. v. Cooper Life Sci., Inc., 34 F.3d 1048, 1054 (Fed. Cir. 1994)). Further, “although the specification often describes very specific embodiments of the invention,” Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303, 1323 (Fed. Cir. 2005), our reviewing court, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, “ha[s] repeatedly warned against confining the claims to those embodiments." Id.

electromed DONNER 2: 397, 426, 580, 584; 10: 526, 626-29; 15: 43
HARMON 6: 134, 137, 206, 226; 17: 95, 98

Superguide Corp. v. Direct TV Enterprises, Inc., 358 F.3d 870, 69 USPQ2d 1865 (Fed. Cir. 2004) 2111.01
HARMON 6: 25, 270

Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303, 75 USPQ2d 1321 (Fed. Cir. 2005) 2111, 2111.01, 2143.01, 2258
DONNER 2: 548-50; 11: 227-36
HARMON 6: 37, 52-65, 76, 87, 91, 130, 142, 153, 161, 165, 170, 210, 220, 233-37, 307, 318, 331, 413

2188 Ex Parte Ballard et al 11700604 - (D) DANG 103 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY LO, KENNETH M

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2423 Ex Parte Soundararajan 10537890 - (D) FISHMAN 103 Duane Morris LLP (Entropic) MENDOZA, JUNIOR O

2445 Ex Parte Amanuddin et al 10972610 - (D) CALVE 103 HOFFMAN WARNICK LLC COULTER, KENNETH R

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2811 Ex Parte Lue et al 11324495 - (D) KIMLIN 103 112(1) MACRONIX C/O HAYNES BEFFEL & WOLFELD LLP HSIEH, HSIN YI

2833 Ex Parte Sommovigo et al 12325111 - (D) KIMLIN 103 LAWRENCE R. OREMLAND, P.C. TA, THO DAC

2839 Ex Parte TAKAMOTO et al 12755639 - (D) HASTINGS 102/103 NIXON & VANDERHYE, PC PATEL, HARSHAD C

2868 Ex Parte Redlich et al 12267187 - (D) KIMLIN 103 ESCHWEILER & ASSOCIATES LLC VAZQUEZ, ARLEEN M

2872 Ex Parte Kihara et al 11485312 - (D) NAGUMO 103 OBLON, SPIVAK, MCCLELLAND MAIER & NEUSTADT, L.L.P. CHAPEL, DEREK S

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3644 Ex Parte Nottingham et al 11065963 - (D) HOELTER 103 112(a)/112(b) PITTS & LAKE P C BERONA, KIMBERLY SUE

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3746 Ex Parte Metzger et al 12001910 - (D) SMEGAL 103 ABELMAN, FRAYNE & SCHWAB BERTHEAUD, PETER JOHN

REEXAMINATION

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2878 Ex parte OY AJAT LTD Patent Owner, Appellant 90011681 6,933,505 10/126,254 RUGGIERO 103 YOUNG & THOMPSON For Third Party Requester: IP & T GROUP LLP GAGLIARDI, ALBERT J original GABOR, OTILIA

kao, soni

custom search

REVERSED 
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2191 Ex Parte Dahms et al 11220820 - (D) KOHUT 103 Jones Day (BlackBerry) - 2N RAMPURIA, SATISH

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2453 Ex Parte Sano 10526587 - (D) MOHANTY 102 Greg Goshorn, P.C. BENOIT, ESTHER

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2648 Ex Parte Ogura 10537699 - (D) HOMERE 102/103 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 103 SUGHRUE MION, PLLC SOBUTKA, PHILIP

2668 Ex Parte Chang et al 10942183 - (D) STRAUSS 102/103 McClure, Qualey & Rodack, LLP TSAI, TSUNG YIN

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2853 Ex Parte Szajewski et al 11964846 - (D) GAUDETTE 103 EASTMAN KODAK COMPANY MARTIN, LAURA E

“[W]hen secondary considerations are present, though they are not always dispositive, it is error not to consider them.” In re Kao, 639 F.3d 1057, 1067 (Fed. Cir. 2011); see also In re Soni, 54 F.3d 746, 750 (Fed. Cir. 1995) (explaining that all evidence of nonobviousness, including data in the specification, must be considered when assessing patentability).

In re Kao, 639 F.3d 1057, ___, 98 USPQ2d 1799, 1811-12 (Fed. Cir. 2011) MPEP § 2111.05
HARMON 4: 21-23; MV4: 228; MV18: 131

Soni, In re, 54 F.3d 746, 34 USPQ2d 1684 (Fed. Cir. 1995) 707.07(f), 2145
DONNER 8: 1311, 1314, 1315, 1675, 1681, 1685, 1688, 1689, 1704

2854 Ex Parte Vest et al 12183461 - (D) HASTINGS 103 CARMODY TORRANCE SANDAK & HENNESSEY LLP FREEMAN, SHEMA TAIAN

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3655 Ex Parte Beutler et al 12342734 - (D) SPAHN 103 HARNESS, DICKEY & PIERCE, P.L.C. HOLMES, JUSTIN

3658 Ex Parte Plews 11514405 - (D) SPAHN 101 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 112(2) GrayRobinson, P.A. BOES, TERENCE

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3766 Ex Parte Faltys et al 11418847 - (D) PER CURIAM 102 (Advanced Bionics)Wong Cabello Lutsch Rutherford & Brucculeri LLP HELLER, TAMMIE K

AFFIRMED-IN-PART 
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1767 Ex Parte Jacobs et al 12145166 - (D) KALAN 103 103 MCDONNELL BOEHNEN HULBERT & BERGHOFF LLP KOLLIAS, ALEXANDER C

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2443 Ex Parte Petersen 11754757 - (D) BAHR 102/103 102/103 Concert Technology Corporation NGUYEN, PHUOC H

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2644 Ex Parte Ashraf et al 11769063 - (D) HOMERE 102/103 102/103 CARLSON, GASKEY & OLDS, P.C./Alcatel-Lucent IRACE, MICHAEL

AFFIRMED 
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1754 Ex Parte Keigler et al 10971726 - (D) WILSON 112(1) 103 ROTHWELL, FIGG, ERNST & MANBECK, P.C. LEADER, WILLIAM T

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2193 Ex Parte Kridner et al 11279691 - (D) LEE 103 TEXAS INSTRUMENTS INCORPORATED VU, TUAN A

2196 Ex Parte Gschiermeister et al 10562380 - (D) SMITH 103 BLAKELY SOKOLOFF TAYLOR & ZAFMAN VERDI, KIMBLEANN C

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2427 Ex Parte Tsuria 10471380 - (D) SMITH 103 Husch Blackwell Sanders LLP Welsh & Katz LANGHNOJA, KUNAL N

2434 Ex Parte Lin et al 11619672 - (D) DANIELS 102 IBM CORP. (DHJ) c/o DAVID H. JUDSON TRAN, TONGOC

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2642 Ex Parte McKiou et al 11317144 - (D) DIXON 103 DUFT BORNSEN & FETTIG, LLP GONZALEZ, AMANCIO

2668 Ex Parte Coon et al 11669575 - (D) DESHPANDE 102/103 IBM (ROC-BKLS) c/o Biggers Kennedy Lenart Spraggins LLP MANGIALASCHI, TRACY

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2885 Ex Parte Shaneour 11764995 - (D) HASTINGS 103 YOUNG BASILE CARIASO, ALAN B

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3695 Ex Parte Banavar et al 12114346 - (D) FETTING 103 RYAN, MASON & LEWIS, LLP KANG, IRENE S

FEDERAL CIRCUIT

REVERSED-IN-PART, VACATED-IN-PART, AND REMANDED 
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1652 BUTAMAX(TM) ADVANCED BIOFUELS LLC, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. GEVO, INC., Defendant- Appellee. 2013-1342 7,851,188 11/586,315 7,993,889 12/018,216 LINN granting of SJ for noninfringement under doctrine of equivalents and invalidity under 112(1)/denial of SJ for infringement  Kirkland & Ellis, LLP; Cooley, LLP FRONDA, CHRISTIAN L

AFFIRMED
2736 PAUL MICHELOTTI, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee. 2013-5131 6023221 08/917,590 PER CURIAM lack of subject matter jurisdiction PAUL MICHELOTTI; US DOJ POPE, DARYL C

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3738 OTTO BOCK HEALTHCARE LP, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ÖSSUR HF AND ÖSSUR AMERICAS, INC., Defendants-Appellees. 2013-1650 6,726,726 09/785,714 09/534,274 LOURIE denial of preliminary injunction Morrison & Foerster, LLP; Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear, LLP original HOLLAND & HART WILLSE, DAVID H

carella, dailey, KSR

custom search

REVERSED 
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2167 Ex Parte Wong 10786941 - (D) GLENN J. PERRY 102/103 HICKMAN PALERMO TRUONG BECKER BINGHAM WONG/ORACLE PHAM, MICHAEL

2184 Ex Parte Moertl et al 11550191 - (D) RUGGIERO 103 IBM CORP. (WIP) c/o WALDER INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW, P.C. TSENG, CHENG YUAN

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2441 Ex Parte Hudson et al 11982081 - (D) FETTING 102 SONYNJ Lerner, David, Littenberg, Krumholz & Mentlik, LLP TAYLOR, NICHOLAS R

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3662 Ex Parte Stanley et al 11698303 - (D) IPPOLITO 103 FOLEY AND LARDNER LLP ALGAHAIM, HELAL A

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3774 Ex Parte KHOURY 11425872 - (D) JENKS 103 Blue Filament Law STEWART, ALVIN J

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2155 Ex Parte Pearson et al 11830541 - (D) FREDMAN 103 103 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY WALDRON, SCOTT A

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2455 Ex Parte Saridakis 11158710 - (D) FETTING 103 103 Winstead PC HENRY, MARIEGEORGES A

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3646 Ex Parte Pop et al 11713144 - (D) JUNG 103 103 Davidson, Davidson & Kappel, LLC GREGORY, BERNARRE

AFFIRMED 
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1633 Ex Parte Bleck et al 10759315 - (D) ADAMS 103 Casimir Jones, S.C. POPA, ILEANA

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2874 Ex Parte Chen et al 11399924 - (D) DELMENDO 103 JAY BROWN LAW FIRM CHU,CHRIS H

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3646 Ex Parte Hyde et al 11605933 - (D) JUNG 103 THE INVENTION SCIENCE FUND CLARENCE T. TEGREENE GREGORY, BERNARRE

3685 Ex Parte Demartini et al 11528680 - (D) FETTING 112(1)/112(2)/102 Reed Smith LLP KIM, STEVEN S

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3782 Ex Parte Hord et al 11982696 - (D) KERINS 103 William M. Hobby, III NEWHOUSE, NATHAN JEFFREY

In arguing that the citation of the references is improper, Appellants contend that citable “prior art must contain some teaching, suggestion or incentive to combine the individually known elements or features in such a manner as to result in the claimed invention.” App. Br. 9 (citing Carella v. Starlight Archery and Pro Line Co., 804 F.2d 135 (Fed. Cir. 1986); see also id. at 7. The Examiner responds that the rejection utilizes both the suggestion that the alternate mating structure of Christoff is a known arrangement and thus substitutable, and also points to case law standing for the proposition that a change in shape or form may well be within the level of ordinary skill in the art. Ans. 13 (citing In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669 (CCPA 1966)).

The decision of the Supreme Court in KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398 (2007), (decided after Carella) recognized that “[t]he obviousness analysis cannot be confined by a formalistic conception of the words teaching, suggestion and motivation . . . .” “What matters [in determining whether the subject matter of a patent claim is obvious] is the objective reach of the claim. If the claim extends to what is obvious, it is invalid under § 103.” Id. at 419. Thus, the question before us is not whether the cited art contains a teaching or suggestion to combine, but rather whether the Examiner provided a reason with a rationale underpinning for the proposed combination. Here, as discussed above, the Examiner did just that.

Carella v. Starlight Archery, 804 F.2d 135, 231 USPQ 644 (Fed. Cir. 1986) 2128, 2132
HARMON 1: 185; 3: 11, 104, 172, 286, 288; 4: 332; 12: 282; 15: 53, 64, 101; 20: 45, 243
DONNER 5: 19; 7: 66, 152, 198, 218, 441, 731; 8: 197

Dailey, In re, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966) 2144.04

KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 USPQ2d 1385 (2007) 2141, ,  2145,   2216,   2242,   2286,   2616,   2642, 2686.04
DONNER 8
HARMON 4

REEXAMINATION

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2815 XILINX, INC. Requester and Respondent v. TAICHI HOLDINGS, LLC. Patent Owner and Appellant 95001551 6,747,350 10/455,525 LEBOVITZ 103 112(1) STERNE, KESSLER, GOLDSTEIN & FOX P.L.L.C. Third Party Requester: SLATER & MATSIL, L.L.P. KIELIN, ERIK J original CLARK, SHEILA V

DENIED
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2181 NVIDIA CORPORATION Requester v. RAMBUS INC. Patent Owner 95001472 6,715,020 10/037,171 SIU Paul M. Anderson, PLLC Third Party Requester HAYNES AND BOONE, LLP ESCALANTE, OVIDIO original AUVE, GLENN ALLEN

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3671 THE TORO COMPANY Requester, Cross-Appellant, Respondent v. WRIGHT MANUFACTURING, INC. Patent Owner, Appellant, Respondent 95001741 6,438,931 09/714,824 SONG NIXON & VANDERHYE PC THIRD PARTY REQUESTER: James W. Miller JASTRZAB, JEFFREY R original FABIAN-KOVACS, ARPAD

3671 THE TORO COMPANY Requester, Cross-Appellant, Respondent v. WRIGHT MANUFACTURING, INC. Patent Owner, Appellant, Respondent 95001742 6,935,093 10/186,680 SONG NIXON & VANDERHYE PC THIRD PARTY REQUESTER: James W. Miller JASTRZAB, JEFFREY R original FABIAN-KOVACS, ARPAD

custom search

REVERSED 
Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3686 Ex Parte Herger et al 12051162 - (D) LORIN 102 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 103 RYAN, MASON & LEWIS, LLP PASS, NATALIE

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3744 Ex Parte Beach et al 11514691 - (D) IPPOLITO 102/103 DAVID J. ARCHER GRAVINI, STEPHEN MICHAEL

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1734 Ex Parte Hordos et al 11789756 - (D) PER CURIAM 103 L.C. Begin & Associates, PLLC FELTON, AILEEN BAKER

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2184 Ex Parte Haustein et al 12059535 - (D) WHITEHEAD, JR. 103 GRIFFITHS & SEATON PLLC (IBM) TSENG, CHENG YUAN

2188 Ex Parte Lin et al 11594068 - (D) BRANCH 103 McClure, Qualey & Rodack, LLP KIM, HONG CHONG

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2814 Ex Parte Anzai et al 11079598 - (D) HOUSEL concurring HANLON 103 FISH & RICHARDSON P.C. (DC) WEISS, HOWARD

clay, antor media, datamize, seattle box

custom search

REVERSED 
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2158 Ex Parte Dao et al 11347404 - (D) BUI 102 HOFFMAN WARNICK LLC TRAN, BAO G

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2461 Ex Parte Erceg et al 12264472 - (D) COURTENAY 103 GARLICK & MARKISON BAIG, ADNAN

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2623 Ex Parte Cruz-Hernandez et al 10926644 - (D) STRAUSS 103 37 CFR § 41.50(b) 101 KILPATRICK TOWNSEND & STOCKTON LLP ZHOU, HONG

To be considered in an obviousness analysis the art must be analogous “prior art” which means the prior art must be in either the same field of Appellants’ endeavor or reasonably pertinent to Appellants’ problem. In re Clay, 966 F.2d 656, 659 (Fed. Cir. 1992). Whether a prior art reference is “analogous” is a question of fact. Id. at 658. The Examiner has not explained why one of ordinary skill in the art would have considered Parmater’s exercise device providing adjustable head resistance as being in the same field of endeavor as Appellants’ apparatus.

Clay, In re, 966 F.2d 656, 23 USPQ2d 1058 (Fed. Cir. 1992) 2144.08
DONNER 8: 262, 267, 275, 283
HARMON 4: 162; 20: 163

2659 Ex Parte Wu 11558145 - (D) PER CURIAM 103 THOMAS | HORSTEMEYER, LLP (Broadcom) GUERRA-ERAZO, EDGAR X

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2829 Ex Parte Kouvetakis et al 11969689 - (D) GARRIS 103 MCDONNELL BOEHNEN HULBERT & BERGHOFF LLP GUPTA, RAJ R

The Examiner is correct that the prior art printed publications Roucka and Jorgenson are presumptively enabling. In re Antor Media Corp., 689 F.3d 1282, 1288 (Fed. Cir. 2012). However, when an applicant challenges enablement of a reference, applicant's evidence and argument must be thoroughly reviewed to determine if the reference is enabling. Id., 689 F.3d at 1292.

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3635 Ex Parte Schwan 10518369 - (D) STAICOVICI 103 ROBERTS MLOTKOWSKI SAFRAN & COLE, P.C. PAINTER, BRANON C

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3721 Ex Parte Ingram et al 11860994 - (D) ABRAMS 102/103 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 112(2) EDWARD S. WRIGHT LONG, ROBERT FRANKLIN

The term “enhanced” is a word of degree, and “when a word of degree is used [a court] must determine
whether the patent’s specification provides some standard for measuring that degree.” Datamize, LLC v. Plumtree Software, Inc., 417 F.3d 1342, 1351 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (quoting Seattle Box Co., Inc. v. Indus. Crating & Packing, Inc., 731 F.2d 818, 826 (Fed. Cir. 1984)). ... Thus, an unrestrained, subjective construction of “strands having enhanced gripping properties” “would not notify the public of the
patentee’s right to exclude since the meaning of the claim language would depend on the unpredictable vagaries of any one person’s opinion . . . . While beauty is in the eye of the beholder, a claim term, to be definite, requires an objective anchor.” Datamize, 417 F.3d at 1350.

Datamize LLC v. Plumtree Software, Inc., 417 F.3d 1342, 75 USPQ2d 1801 (Fed. Cir. 2005) 2173.05(b)
Seattle Box Co. v. Industrial Crating & Packing, Inc., 731 F.2d 818, 221 USPQ 568 (Fed. Cir. 1984) 2173.05(b)
DONNER 10: 290, 292, 566; 14: 31, 53, 54, 442
HARMON 5: 272, 274; 13: 235; 18: 289, 307, 314

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2476 Ex Parte Schmidl et al 11360654 - (D) SHIANG 103 103 TEXAS INSTRUMENTS INCORPORATED HSIUNG, HAI-CHANG

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2648 Ex Parte Huck 11717701 - (D) COURTENAY 102/103 102/103/obviousness-type double patenting BUCHANAN, INGERSOLL & ROONEY PC TSVEY, GENNADIY

AFFIRMED 
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2164 Ex Parte Wan et al 10906513 - (D) COURTENAY 103 Cuenot, Forsythe & Kim, LLC CHOI, YUK TING

2193 Ex Parte Harvey et al 11674893 - (D) KUMAR 103 Murphy, Bilak & Homiller, PLLC VU, TUAN A

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2425 Ex Parte CHOI et al 12133946 - (D) KRIVAK 103 SUGHRUE MION, PLLC LEWIS, JONATHAN V

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2632 Ex Parte Amizic et al 12427387 - (D) FISHMAN 102/obviousness-type double patenting Zenith Electronics LLC PUENTE, EVA YI ZHENG

REHEARING

DENIED
Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3763 Ex Parte Daneshvar 11731945 - (R) ADAMS 103 Yousef Daneshvar, MD FACC. SCHMIDT, EMILY LOUISE

FEDERAL CIRCUIT

AFFIRMED 
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1621 SOLVAY S.A., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL INC., Defendant-Appellee. 2012-1660 6,730,817 09/051,746 DYK dissenting NEWMAN 102(g)(2) Williams & Connolly LLP; Kirkland & Ellis LLP original NOVAK DRUCE CONNOLLY BOVE + QUIGG LLP PRICE, ELVIS O

lintner

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1791 Ex Parte Fabre et al 12133115 - (D) KRATZ 103 K&L Gates LLP DEES, NIKKI H

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2163 Ex Parte HUFFMAN et al 11780777 - (D) HULSE 103 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 101 IBM_SVL c/o Sawyer Law Group, P.C. GOFMAN, ALEX N

cf. In re Lintner, 458 F.2d 1013, 1015 (CCPA 1972) (citation omitted) (“Claims which are broad enough to read on obvious subject matter are unpatentable even though they also read on nonobvious subject matter.”).

Lintner, In re, 458 F.2d 1013, 173 USPQ 560 (CCPA 1972) 2142, 2143.01, 2144, 2144.08, 2145
DONNER 8: 95

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2833 Ex Parte Gleissner et al 11885906 - (D) KRATZ 103 FROMMER LAWRENCE & HAUG FIGUEROA, FELIX O

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3749 Ex Parte Bash et al 11353557 - (D) CAPP 103 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY KOSANOVIC, HELENA

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1631 Ex Parte Ishikawa et al 11186394 - (D) PER CURIAM 102 102 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 103 THE INVENTION SCIENCE FUND CLARENCE T. TEGREENE LIN, JERRY

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1789 Ex Parte Chen 11742104 - (D) SMITH 103 DICKINSON WRIGHT PLLC COLE, ELIZABETH M

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2441 Ex Parte Doyle et al 10831056 - (D) ASTORINO 103 LAW OFFICE OF MARCIA L. DOUBET, P. L. BATURAY, ALICIA

2441 Ex Parte Yao 10593524 - (D) FETTING 102/103 Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. c/o Conley Rose, P.C. ZONG,RUOLEI

2447 Ex Parte O'SULLIVAN et al 11967853 - (D) MORRISON 101/103 IBM CORPORATION C/O: VanCott Bagley, Cornwall & McCarthy ISOM, JOHN W

2434 Ex Parte Garay et al 10976353 - (D) KUMAR 101/102/103 RYAN, MASON & LEWIS, LLP TRAN, TONGOC

2483 Ex Parte Thangaraj et al 10816724 - (D) STRAUSS 103 THOMAS | HORSTEMEYER, LLP (Broadcom) HOLDER, ANNER N

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2655 Ex Parte Shuttleworth et al 11757798 - (D) MILLS 102/103 Brooks Kushman P.C./Harman LAO, LUNSEE

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3695 Ex Parte Kennedy et al 11428201 - (D) MEDLOCK 102/103 112(1)/112(2)/101 KILPATRICK TOWNSEND & STOCKTON LLP DONLON, RYAN D