tokai

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2126 Ex Parte Rao et al 11332558 - (D) DIXON 103 BAKER BOTTS L.L.P. NORTON, JENNIFER L

2141 Ex Parte Singh 11476435 - (D) FREDMAN 102/103 JENKINS, WILSON, TAYLOR & HUNT, P.A. SCENERA RESEARCH, LLC GUTIERREZ, ANDRES E

2175 Ex Parte Chakra et al 11846617 - (D) ADAMS 102/103 CRGO LAW STEVEN M. GREENBERG HO, RUAY L

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2875 Ex Parte IJZERMAN et al 13312101 - (D) ANKENBRAND 103 PHILIPS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY & STANDARDS TUMEBO, TSION M

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3617 Ex Parte Palinkas et al 12266181 - (D) WOODS 103 CHEMTURA CORPORATION BELLINGER, JASON R

3618 Ex Parte Kessler 12086277 - (D) HORNER 102/103 41.50 112(2) PAULEY PETERSEN & ERICKSON GURARI, EREZ

3675 Ex Parte Michael et al 12313933 - (D) WOODS 103 LATHROP & GAGE LLP LUGO, CARLOS

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2457 Ex Parte Breed 11968844 - (D) MORGAN 103 103 BRIAN ROFFE, ESQ TAYLOR, NICHOLAS R

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1627 Ex Parte Baur et al 12519410 - (D) McCOLLUM 103 MILES & STOCKBRIDGE, PC IVANOVA, SVETLANA M

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2123 Ex Parte Georgis et al 11974715 - (D) MANTIS MERCADER 103 Redwood Patent Law CHAD, ANISS

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2451 Ex Parte Bowman et al 10395081 - (D) FISHMAN 103 GOWLING LAFLEUR HENDERSON LLP PATEL, DHAIRYA A

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2631 Ex Parte Oksman 11599210 - (D) ZADO 103 Eschweiler & Associates (Lantiq) HUANG, DAVID S

2691 Ex Parte Amagami et al 12604001 - (D) JIVANI 103 Russell Ng PLLC (LENOVO) MISTRY, RAM A

REHEARING

DENIED
Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3643 Ex Parte Noblitt 11738257 - (D) FREDMAN 103 THE NOBLITT GROUP, PLLC VALENTI, ANDREA M

REEXAMINATION

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 2600 Communications
2682 APPLE, INC., Requester, v. CLASSCO INC., Patent Owner. Ex Parte 6970695 et al 10/042,686 95002109 - (D) SIU 103 DAVID M QUINLAN, PC THIRD PARTY REQUESTER: MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP LEUNG, CHRISTINA Y original NGUYEN, LEE

In other words, Patent Owner does not demonstrate a sufficient nexus between the alleged “praise” and the claimed invention. In addition, as previously discussed, storing identification data and producing a voice announcement (i.e., audio corresponding to identification data of a caller) is disclosed by Fujioka. Under these circumstances, the alleged “praise” stems from what was known in the prior art so that there can be no nexus. Tokai Corp. v. Easton Enters., Inc., 632 F.3d 1358, 1369 (Fed. Cir. 2011). ...

Hence, at best, the alleged commercial success would stem from a feature disclosed in the prior art so that there can be no nexus. Tokai Corp. v. Easton Enters., Inc., 632 F.3d 1358, 1369 (Fed. Cir. 2011).

astrazeneca, ngai, king

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2155 Ex Parte Yates et al 11900931 - (D) DANG 103 EDELL, SHAPIRO, & FINNAN, LLC HERSHLEY, MARK E

2161 Ex Parte Szabo 11942556 - (D) FRAHM 102 Trellis IP Law Group/ Sony Corp. LE, HUNG D

2181 Ex Parte Nogueras et al 12135999 - (D) DIXON 103 Greg Goshorn, P.C. LEE, CHUN KUAN

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2647 Ex Parte Hulkkonen et al 12743343 - (D) JIVANI 102/103 Squire Patton Boggs (US) LLP Nokia Technologies Oy TRANDAI, CINDY HUYEN

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3652 Ex Parte Rother et al 12151965 - (D) HILL 103 MARK P. STONE HAGEMAN, MARK C

3657 Ex Parte Jolley et al 12258212 - (D) ASTORINO 103 BAKER BOTTS L.L.P. WILLIAMS, THOMAS J

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3766 Ex Parte Singhal et al 11526514 - (D) WIEKER 112(2)/103 SHUMAKER & SIEFFERT , P.A PATEL, NATASHA

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2813 Ex Parte Zundel et al 12186034 - (D) HANLON 103 103 DICKE, BILLIG & CZAJA NICELY, JOSEPH C

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1633 Ex Parte Connor et al 11407446 - (D) PAULRAJ 103 McCarter & English / KCI NGUYEN, QUANG

Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1764 Ex Parte Asandei 12052947 - (D) McKELVEY 103 CANTOR COLBURN LLP KAUCHER, MARK S

1767 Ex Parte Hayashi et al 12280300 - (D) SMITH 102/103/obviousness-type double patenting BUCHANAN, INGERSOLL & ROONEY PC HEINCER, LIAM J

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2183 Ex Parte Ferren et al 11292207 - (D) KRIVAK 112(2)/102/103 Constellation Law Group, PLLC FAHERTY, COREY S

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2435 Ex Parte Shapiro 11132923 - (D) FRAHM 103 Wolfe-SBMC SCHWARTZ, DARREN B

2442 Ex Parte Faraj 11837024 - (D) SHIANG 101 103 Kennedy Lenart Spraggins LLP IBM (ROC-BKLS) MACILWINEN, JOHN MOORE JAIN

2466 Ex Parte Khuc 11434841 - (D) TROCK 103 SPRINT OH, ANDREW CHUNG SUK

2476 Ex Parte Wakumoto 11680089 - (D) BUI 102/103/obviousness-type double patenting HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY GHAFOERKHAN, FAIYAZKHAN

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2644 Ex Parte Hurtta et al 12213551 - (D) BAER 103 Mintz Levin/Nokia Technologies Oy HO, HUY C

2657 Ex Parte Bollenbacher et al 12130934 - (D) DIXON 103 CRGO LAW STEVEN M. GREENBERG PULLIAS, JESSE SCOTT

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3725 Ex Parte Schultz 12757366 - (D) GOODSON 103 41.50 103 FAY SHARPE LLP LEWIS, JUSTIN V

In essence, Appellant argues that the illustrations functionally interrelate with the mat because they represent instructions for using the mat to carry out inspection and cleaning. Yet the Federal Circuit’s precedents have “foreclosed the argument that simply adding new instructions to a known product creates the functional relationship necessary to distinguish the product from the prior art.” AstraZeneca LP v. Apotex Inc., 633 F.3d 1042, 1065 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (citing In re Ngai, 367 F.3d 1336, 1339 (Fed. Cir. 2004)). In Ngai, the court found that, in a kit claim, recited instructions for using the kit were not entitled to patentable weight because “the printed matter in no way depends on the kit, and the kit does not depend on the printed matter. All that the printed matter does is teach a new use for an existing product.” Ngai, 367 F.3d at 1339. Likewise, here, the illustrations on the mat do not depend on the mat, and the mat does not depend on the illustrations. The illustrations simply convey information to a user about cleaning and inspection operations that can be carried out on the mat.

“The rationale behind [the printed matter] line of cases is preventing the indefinite patenting of known products by the simple inclusion of novel, yet functionally unrelated limitations.” King Pharm., 616 F.3d at 1279 (Fed. Cir. 2010); see also Ngai, 367 F.3d at 1339 (“If we were to adopt Ngai’s position, anyone could continue patenting a product indefinitely provided that they add a new instruction sheet to the product.”). In this case, permitting Appellant to distinguish the prior art based on the contents of the illustrations appearing on the mat would allow continued patenting of a known product by the mere inclusion of novel non-functional descriptive material. 

Ngai, In re, 367 F.3d 1336, 70 USPQ2d 1862 (Fed. Cir. 2004) 2112.01

King Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Eon Labs Inc., 616 F.3d 1267, 95 USPQ2d 1833 (Fed. Cir. 2010) 2111.05

3762 Ex Parte Kelly et al 12423407 - (D) PAULRAJ 103 GARLICK & MARKISON LEVICKY, WILLIAM J

3779 Ex Parte SUZUSHIMA et al 11539421 - (D) ADAMS 102 OSTROLENK FABER LLP NEWTON, ALEXANDRA L

3788 Ex Parte Erickson et al 13013331 - (D) JESCHKE 102/103/obviousness-type double patenting SEAGER, TUFTE & WICKHEM, LLC STASHICK, ANTHONY D

REHEARING

DENIED
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2127 Ex Parte Ferren et al 10909132 - (D) EVANS 102 IV - SUITER SWANTZ PC LLO RAO, SHEELA S

REEXAMINATION

REVERSED
Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2838 VICOR CORPORATION Requester v. SYNQOR, INC. Patent Owner and Appellant Ex Parte 7,564,702 et al 11/901,263 95001853 - (D) MOORE 103 GREENBLUM & BERNSTEIN, P.L.C. Third Party Requester: Turner Boyd, LLP HEYMAN, JOHN S original NGUYEN, MATTHEW VAN

REHEARING

DENIED
Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3714 HASBRO, INC., Requester, v. GANZ, Patent Owner. Ex Parte 7,677,948 B2 et al 11/027,880 95001341 - (D) SIU 103 Pearne & Gordon LLP for THIRD PARTY REQUESTER: PERKINS COIE L.L.P. KISS, ERIC B original AHMED, MASUD

bond, akzo, standard havens, festo, omega, southwall, clement

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 2600 Communications
2633 Ex Parte Bar-Ness et al 13110989 - (D) WINSOR 103 PANITCH SCHWARZE BELISARIO & NADEL LLP JOSEPH, JAISON

2692 Ex Parte Nakamura et al 11783063 - (D) HOMERE 103 Birch, Stewart, Kolasch & Birch, LLP MERKOULOVA, OLGA VLADIMIROVNA

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2463 Ex Parte Raju et al 12127600 - (D) BARRETT 103 103 BAKER BOTTS L.L.P. ANWAR, MOHAMMAD S

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1766 Ex Parte Mabey et al 12586472 - (D) DELMENDO 103 CHRISTOPHER JOHN RUDY BOYLE, KARA BRADY

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2117 Ex Parte Udell et al 12197892 - (D) SMITH 103 Mentor Graphics Corporation NGUYEN, STEVE N

2155 Ex Parte Moerchen et al 12072222 - (D) BEAMER 103 SIEMENS CORPORATION HERSHLEY, MARK E

2161 Ex Parte CHAUDHURI et al 12487434 - (D) KUMAR 102 Ditthavong & Steiner, P.C. LU, CHARLES EDWARD

2164 Ex Parte Hyde et al 12218627 - (D) KIMBERLY J. McGRAW 102/103 Constellation Law Group, PLLC ADAMS, CHARLES D

We reject Appellants argument that the Examiner must demonstrate that the identical language of claim 75 appears in the cited reference in order for the reference to anticipate. See e.g., App. Br. 26. The test of whether a reference teaches a claim limitation is not whether the exact language of the
limitation is present in the reference. Rather, the relevant inquiry is whether the limitation is taught or suggested by the prior art when the claim is given its broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification. See e.g., In re Bond, 910 F.2d 831, 832–33 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (interpretation of references “is not an ‘ipsissimis verbis’ test); Akzo N. V. v. U.S. Int’l Trade Comm’n, 808 F.2d 1471, 1479 & n.11 (Fed. Cir. 1986); see also Standard Havens Prods., Inc. v. Gencor Indus., Inc., 953 F.2d 1360, 1369 (Fed. Cir. 1991)(“An anticipatory reference . . . need not duplicate word for word what is in the claims.”)

Bond, In re, 910 F.2d 831, 15 USPQ2d 1566 (Fed. Cir. 1990) 2131 , 2152.02(b) , 2183 , 2184

Akzo N.V. v. International Trade Comm’n, 808 F.2d 1471, 1 USPQ2d 1241 (Fed. Cir. 1986) 2131.02

2166 Ex Parte LIPPINCOTT et al 12044775 - (D) GALLIGAN 101/103 41.50 103 WALDER INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW, P.C. IBM CORP. (WIP) GMAHL, NAVNEET K

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2421 Ex Parte Card et al 12261662 - (D) SHIANG 102/103 Lowe Graham Jones PLLC MONTOYA, OSCHTA I

2424 Ex Parte Hill et al 11937901 - (D) COURTENAY 103 ROGITZ & ASSOCIATES TILAHUN, ALAZAR

2438 Ex Parte Shah et al 11566125 - (D) HOMERE 103 Oblon/Broadcom Corporation JEUDY, JOSNEL

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2659 Ex Parte BOO 11837244 - (D) THOMAS 102/103 THE FARRELL LAW FIRM, P.C. ARMSTRONG, ANGELA A

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3623 Ex Parte Stripling et al 12648899 - (D) HOELTER 103 AT & T Legal Department - FKM GILLS, KURTIS

3624 Ex Parte Ritter et al 11735739 - (D) KIM 103 FISH & RICHARDSON, P.C. PRASAD, NANCY N

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3746 Ex Parte Nakamura 12374725 - (D) HOFFMANN 103 BGL/Panasonic BAYOU, AMENE SETEGNE

3782 Ex Parte Harrelson 12474779 - (D) HOFFMANN 103 WOMBLE CARLYLE SANDRIDGE & RICE, LLP ELKINS, GARY E

REEXAMINATION

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2833 Ex parte LAWRENCE B. LOCKWOOD Ex Parte 7010508 et al 08/418,772 90012671 - (D) COURTENAY 102/103 STERNE, KESSLER, GOLDSTEIN & FOX P.L.L.C. Third Part Requestor: Schwegman Lundberg & Woessner/Reexams REICHLE, KARIN M original CHUNG TRANS, XUONG MY

During reexamination before the USPTO, we decline to consider the prosecution history (as a court would in patent infringement litigation) for purposes of claim construction because reexamination is de novo examination without deference to the previous examination which determined patentability in the first instance. See 35 U.S.C. §305. Cf. with prosecution history estoppel which prevents a patentee from recapturing through the doctrine of equivalents the subject matter that the applicant
surrendered during prosecution. Festo Corp. v. Shoketsu Kinzoku Kogyo Kabushiki Co., Ltd., 535 U.S. 722, 734 (2002). Cf. also with the doctrine of prosecution disclaimer: “[W]here the patentee has unequivocally disavowed a certain meaning to obtain his patent, the doctrine of prosecution disclaimer attaches and narrows the ordinary meaning of the claim congruent with the scope of the surrender.” Omega Engineering, Inc., v. Raytek Corp., 334 F.3d 1314, 1324 (Fed. Cir. 2003). “Claims may not be construed one way in order to obtain their allowance and in a different way against accused infringers.” Southwall Technologies, Inc. v. Cardinal IG Co., 54 F.3d 1570, 1576 (Fed. Cir. 1995) (citation omitted). Thus, we find statements by both Owner and the Examiner that purport to give deference to the prosecution history for purposes of claim construction during reexamination are misplaced. See, e.g., App. Br. 14–15; Final Rejection 14. However, we note that prosecution history is considered by the USPTO for the purpose of determining attempted recapture of surrendered subject matter in reissue examinations. See, e.g., In re Clement, 131 F.3d 1464 (Fed. Cir. 1997).

Festo Corp. v. Shoketsu Kinzoku Kogyo Kabushiki Co., 535 U.S. 722, 122 S.Ct. 1831, 62 USPQ2d 1705 (2002) 1302.14 , 2173.02

Clement, In re, 131 F.3d 1464, 45 USPQ2d 1161 (Fed. Cir. 1997) 1412.02

gal, chu

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1726 Ex Parte Schneider et al 12840578 - (D) DELMENDO 103 Delphi Technologies, Inc. MCCONNELL, WYATT P

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2172 Ex Parte Eveleigh 11280743 - (D) WIEKER 103 McDermott Will & Emery LLP HUR, ECE

2192 Ex Parte Andersson et al 12423139 - (D) PINKERTON 102/103 41.50 102/103 MARSH FISCHMANN & BREYFOGLE LLP Oracle formerly d/b/a Sun Microsystems NGUYEN, MONGBAO

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2666 Ex Parte Lee et al 11168383 - (D) PINKERTON 103 Birch, Stewart, Kolasch & Birch, LLP LEFKOWITZ, SUMATI

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2881 Ex Parte Bateman et al 11571917 - (D) OWENS 103 Waters Technologies Corporation IPPOLITO, NICOLE MARIE

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3662 Ex Parte Wang 12518108 - (D) GUIJT 103 Flash Intellectual Property, Inc. TO, TUAN C

3671 Ex Parte Lutz 12954407 - (D) HOELTER 103 MATHEW J. TEMMERMAN RISIC, ABIGAIL ANNE

We are not persuaded by the Examiner's assertion of "design choice" because Appellant has disclosed that the claimed design acheived desired different functions different from the prior art.  See In re Gal, 980 F.2d 717, 719 (Fed. Cir. 1992); see also In re Chu, 66 F.3d 292, 299 (Fed. Cir. 1995) (holding that a claimed feature was not a matter of design choice where there was no suggestion or teaching to modify the prior art in this manner and applicant introduced evidence showing the benefits of the claimed feature).

Chu, In re, 66 F.3d 292, 36 USPQ2d 1089 (Fed. Cir. 1995) 211.05 , 716.02(f) , 1504.20 , 2145 ,

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3716 Ex Parte Rouse et al 13244818 - (D) HOELTER 102 Schwegman Lundberg & Woessner / Zynga ROWLAND, STEVE

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2865 Ex Parte Hrischuk et al 12344052 - (D) GAUDETTE 102 101 Cuenot, Forsythe & Kim, LLC SUAREZ, FELIX E

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3747 Ex Parte O`Connor Gibson et al 12563203 - (D) CAPP 102/103 102 BROOKS KUSHMAN P.C./FGTL KWON, JOHN

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1612 Ex Parte Baig et al 10737425 - (D) ADAMS 102/103 THE PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY PACKARD, BENJAMIN J

1647 Ex Parte ROSENBLUM 12552103 - (D) ADAMS 103 Parker Highlander PLLC SAOUD, CHRISTINE J

Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1772 Ex Parte Grootveld et al 12096299 - (D) DELMENDO 103 SHELL OIL COMPANY ROBINSON, RENEE E

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2113 Ex Parte Fey et al 12063458 - (D) HORVATH 102/103 CONTINENTAL AUTOMOTIVE SYSTEMS, INC. DUNCAN, MARC M

2114 Ex Parte McCroskey et al 12341648 - (D) LENTIVECH 103 HONEYWELL/IFL KO, CHAE M

2161 Ex Parte Stremel et al 11701566 - (D) DANG 103 Facebook/Fenwick DAYE, CHELCIE L

2164 Ex Parte Hyde et al 12290227 - (D) DEJMEK 101/112(2)/102/103 Constellation Law Group, PLLC ADAMS, CHARLES D

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2649 Ex Parte Janik et al 10802518 - (D) BUI 103 FOLEY & LARDNER LLP DEAN, RAYMOND S

2659 Ex Parte Lee et al 12183437 - (D) FISHMAN 103 MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP PALO ALTO APPLE SIRJANI, FARIBA

2661 Ex Parte Vaysburg et al 12431914 - (D) KHAN 103 LAW OFFICE OF GERALD MALISZEWSKI MONK, MARK T

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2800 Ex Parte Deffler 12477512 - (D) FINK 102 Baker Botts LLP LIANG, VEI CHUNG

2834 Ex Parte Namikoshi et al 12594698 - (D) BEST 103 WESTERMAN, HATTORI, DANIELS & ADRIAN, LLP MULLINS, BURTON S

REHEARING

DENIED
Tech Center 2600 Communications
2689 Ex Parte LU et al 12367999 - (D) ARPIN 103 ROBERT E MALM BEE, ANDREW W.

mayne

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1656 Ex Parte Yokoyama et al 12541220 - (D) POLLOCK 103 CERMAK NAKAJIMA MCGOWAN LLP MOORE, WILLIAM W

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2159 Ex Parte Aoyama et al 12323633 - (D) POTHIER 103 41.50(b) 101 DAMBROSIO & MENON, P.L.L.C. CONYERS, DAWAUNE A

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2466 Ex Parte Tallet 11297027 - (D) SILVERMAN 103 PATTERSON & SHERIDAN, LLP/CISC CRUTCHFIELD, CHRISTOPHER M

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2656 Ex Parte Alexander et al 11644651 - (D) BUI 103 BROOKS KUSHMAN P.C. /Oracle America/ SUN / STK MCCORD, PAUL C

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3641 Ex Parte CONSTANT et al 11972018 - (D) STEPINA 103 Ballard Spahr LLP CLEMENT, MICHELLE RENEE

3688 Ex Parte Theiste et al 10641173 - (D) MEDLOCK 103 HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP VANDERHORST, MARIA VICTORIA

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3729 Ex Parte Cherry 12260670 - (D) MARSCHALL 102 PRICE HENEVELD LLP KUE, KAYING

3777 Ex Parte Avni et al 10551053 - (D) GRIMES 103 Pearl Cohen Zedek Latzer Baratz LLP BRUTUS, JOEL F

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2156 Ex Parte Isberg et al 12630908 - (D) McKEOWN 102 102 COATS & BENNETT/SONY ERICSSON VO, TRUONG V

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2837 Ex Parte Dudde et al 11572791 - (D) HOUSEL 103 103 LATHROP & GAGE LLP CHAN, KAWING

2845 Ex Parte Baker 11818996 - (D) NAGUMO 103 103 FLETCHER YODER (MICRON TECHNOLOGY, INC.) JEAN PIERRE, PEGUY

To be clear, the issue is not the adequacy of the original disclosure, which is directed to persons having ordinary skill in the art. Rather, the issue is whether the record contains sufficient evidence that a non-expert reviewer can make adequate findings to draw conclusions as to the meaning of these terms to the artisan. Cf. In re Mayne, 104 F.3d 1339, 1344 (Fed. Cir. 1997) in which the Applicant tried to show unexpected results. The court held that “[e]ven were it obvious to a practitioner of the art, applicants have the burden to provide the PTO with evidence showing that such is the case.”

Mayne, In re, 104 F.3d 1339, 41 USPQ2d 1451 (Fed. Cir. 1977) 2144.09 , 2145

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1629 Ex Parte Epstein et al 11158452 - (D) GRIMES 103 SEAGER, TUFTE & WICKHEM, LLC LUNDGREN, JEFFREY S

Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1771 Ex Parte Keppers 12378671 - (D) ANKENBRAND 103 EMCH, SCHAFFER, SCHAUB & PORCELLO CO BOYER, RANDY

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2199 Ex Parte Lin et al 11615891 - (D) FINK 102/103 KONRAD RAYNES DAVDA & VICTOR, LLP IBM54 GOORAY, MARK A

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2614 Ex Parte Tanaka et al 11921741 - (D) COURTENAY 103 OLIFF PLC YANG, RYAN R

2641 Ex Parte Hildebrand et al 10536253 - (D) HUME 112(2) 103 Carstens & Cahoon, LLP AJIBADE AKONAI, OLUMIDE

2687 Ex Parte Michalk et al 11948774 - (D) GAUDETTE 103 Sheridan Ross PC TWEEL JR, JOHN ALEXANDER

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3745 Ex Parte McCaffrey 11775523 - (D) HOFFMANN 102/103 CARLSON, GASKEY & OLDS/PRATT & WHITNEY ELLIS, RYAN H

sneed, schaumann, petering

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1771 Ex Parte STAUFFER 13306363 - (D) HASTINGS 103 YOUNG BASILE STEIN, MICHELLE

1783 Ex Parte Doan et al 12841221 - (D) WILSON 102/103 MACMILLAN, SOBANSKI & TODD, LLC - FORD VAN SELL, NATHAN L

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2473 Ex Parte Zheng et al 11702553 - (D) DANG 103 HARNESS, DICKEY & PIERCE, P.L.C. BOKHARI, SYED M

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2696 Ex Parte Fitzli et al 12043236 - (D) BAER 102/103 KILPATRICK TOWNSEND & STOCKTON LLP SPAR, ILANA L

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3685 Ex Parte Das et al 12824265 - (D) MEDLOCK 112(1)/103 PITNEY BOWES INC. RAVETTI, DANTE

3688 Ex Parte Sylvain 12341335 - (D) BAYAT 102/103 WITHROW & TERRANOVA, P.L.L.C. NETZLOFF, ERIC R

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3741 Ex Parte Rathmann 12390901 - (D) GOODSON 103 Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney PC ALSTOM TECHNOLOGY, LTD. NGUYEN, ANDREW H

3754 Ex Parte BOGANI et al 12612833 - (D) ASTORINO 103 PATENTS ON DEMAND, P.A.-General SHAVER, KEVIN P

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1642 Ex Parte Mischak et al 11126385 - (D) FREDMAN 112(1)/102/103 112(2)/103 DARDI & HERBERT, PLLC AEDER, SEAN E

Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1733 Ex Parte Suzuki et al 12570861 - (D) ROESEL 112(2) 112(4)/103 GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY ROE, JESSEE RANDALL

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3635 Ex Parte FAGAN et al 12023199 - (D) CAPP 103 103 BERENATO & WHITE, LLC KWIECINSKI, RYAN D

It is well established that "it is not necessary that the inventions of the references be physically combinable to render obvious the invention under review." In re Sneed, 710 F.2d 1544, 1550 (Fed. Cir. 1983).

Sneed, In re, 710 F.2d 1544, 218 USPQ 385 (Fed. Cir. 1983) 1445 , 2145

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1725 Ex Parte Grootveld et al 11428478 - (D) HASTINGS 102/103 SHELL OIL COMPANY AKRAM, IMRAN

Cf. In re Schaumann, 572 F.2d 312, 317 (CCPA 1978) (In order to anticipate, a reference must identify something falling within the claimed subject matter with sufficient specificity to constitute a description thereof within the purview of § 102.). It is well established that specific examples of the claimed subject matter are not necessary to establish anticipation. Rather, to anticipate, one skilled in the art must be able to “at once envisage” the claimed subject matter in the prior art disclosure. In re Petering, 301 F.2d 676, 681 (CCPA 1962).

Schauman, In re, 572 F.2d 312, 197 USPQ 5 (CCPA 1978) 706.02(m) , 2131.02 , 2144.08

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

1742 Ex Parte Silvi et al 12043546 - (D) DELMENDO 103 GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY HUSON, MONICA ANNE

1793 Ex Parte Saggin 12302574 - (D) ROESEL 103 K&L Gates LLP-Chicago MUKHOPADHYAY, BHASKAR

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2165 Ex Parte Bouzid et al 12171327 - (D) HUME 103 FISH & RICHARDSON P.C. SYED, FARHAN M

2191 Ex Parte Li et al 11777342 - (D) HORVATH 103 RYAN, MASON & LEWIS, LLP CHEN, QING

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2424 Ex Parte Gentric 12066106 - (D) KAISER 103 NXP B.V. Intellectual Property and Licensing SHEPARD, JUSTIN E

2448 Ex Parte Ravi et al 12207526 - (D) STRAUSS 101/102 Garg Law Firm, PLLC IBM AUS IPLAW (GLF) EDWARDS, JAMES A

2467 Ex Parte Park et al 11410360 - (D) WHITEHEAD JR. 103 LOWE HAUPTMAN & HAM, LLP SMITH, MARCUS

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2616 Ex Parte Haggar et al 12208786 - (D) DANG 103 MOORE & VAN ALLEN, PLLC For IBM GENNENE, FIKRU

2637 Ex Parte Shin et al 11998286 - (D) MacDONALD 103 Cha & Reiter, LLC LI, SHI K

2682 Ex Parte Riley et al 12334821 - (D) DANG 102/103 MICHAEL BEST & FRIEDRICH LLP (Bosch) RUSHING, MARK S

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2838 Ex Parte JANG et al 12235708 - (D) ROESEL 103 INGRASSIA FISHER & LORENZ, P.C. (GM) FINCH III, FRED E

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3744 Ex Parte Arora et al 11763336 - (D) GOODSON 102 FRANK ROSENBERG LEO, LEONARD R

3763 Ex Parte Hwang et al 12103322 - (D) ADAMS 102/103 The Webb Firm Becton, Dickinson and Company PATEL, SHEFALI DILIP

3777 Ex Parte Fuimaono et al 10569957 - (D) ADAMS 103 HARNESS, DICKEY & PIERCE, P.L.C. NGUYEN, HIEN NGOC

baxter travenol

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2167 Ex Parte Stallings 12171714 - (D) DEJMEK 102 Schwegman Lundberg & Woessner / Raytheon BROMELL, ALEXANDRIA Y

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3682 Ex Parte Stetson et al 11972837 - (D) MEDLOCK 103 DENTONS US LLP ALVAREZ, RAQUEL

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2162 Ex Parte Lim 11966419 - (D) SHIANG 102 102/103 Charles A. Rattner FLEURANTIN, JEAN B

Appellant fails to show reversable error because Appellant fails to provide adequate analysis to rebut such Examiner's findings.  As a result, such Examiner's findings are undisputed.  See In re Baxter Travenol Labs., 952 F.2d 388, 391 (Fed. Cir. 1991) ("It is not the function of this court [or thisBoard] to examine the claims in greater detail than argued by an appellant, looking for [patentable] ... distinctions over the prior art.").

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

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2468 Ex Parte Diebel 11992527 - (D) SHIANG 103 103 Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney PC (SEN) Fritzsche Patent NAWAZ, ASAD M

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3623 Ex Parte Tomastik et al 11618802 - (D) BAYAT 112(1)/112(2)/103 101 Bachman & LaPointe, P.C. SWARTZ, STEPHEN S

3673 Ex Parte Keil et al 12102425 - (D) HOFFMANN 103 103 Midmark Corporation c/o Frost Brown Todd LLC CONLEY, FREDRICK C

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1726 Ex Parte Nagasaki et al 11587261 - (D) GARRIS 103 McDermott Will and Emery LLP LEWIS, BEN

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2427 Ex Parte McManus et al 12284759 - (D) KAISER 102/103 PANASONIC AUTOMOTIVE SYSTEM COMPANY OF AMERICA LANGHNOJA, KUNAL N

2447 Ex Parte Adams et al 11227607 - (D) KHAN 103 RIDOUT & MAYBEE LLP TANG, KAREN C

2451 Ex Parte Smith 12075731 - (D) KHAN 103 RGIP LLC TIV, BACKHEAN

2468 Ex Parte Mickle et al 11321556 - (D) LENTIVECH 103 AT&T Legal Department - CC CHU, WUTCHUNG

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3693 Ex Parte Ramos et al 11196730 - (D) KIM 103 37 CFR 41.50(b) 103 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman, LLP (NV) BORLINGHAUS, JASON M