western union

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2863 Ex Parte PISARENCO et al 13490416 - (D) RANGE 102/103 STERNE, KESSLER, GOLDSTEIN & FOX P.L.L.C. DINH, LYNDA

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1676 Ex Parte Struck et al 13583350 - (D) NEW 103 MILLEN, WHITE, ZELANO & BRANIGAN, P.C. SKOWRONEK, KARLHEINZ R

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2139 Ex Parte Jayasimha et al 13899258 - (D) POTHIER 102/103 Rutan & Tucker, LLP WANG, EDWARD

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2847 Ex Parte Ishibashi et al 13867275 - (D) KRATZ 103 KENEALY VAIDYA LLP NGUYEN, CHAU N

2881 Ex Parte Pinappu et al 13872786 - (D) INGLESE 103 Mossman, Kumar and Tyler, PC TSAI, HSIEN C

cf. Western Union Co. v. Money Gram Payment Sys., 626 F.3d 1361, 1370 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (holding obvious “routine modifications that are a part of adapting a new technology to an existing system”). 

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3749 Ex Parte Arslan et al 12810925 - (D) BROWNE 103 KILPATRICK TOWNSEND & STOCKTON LLP SHIRSAT, VIVEK K

ormco

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2424 Ex Parte Phillips et al 14035665 - (D) PYONIN 102/103 ERICSSON INC. BAIG, SAHAR A

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3685 Ex Parte VALENZUELA et al 12475836 - (D) MEDLOCK 103 Rimon P. C. WINTER, JOHN M

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3736 Ex Parte Weiss 14125737 - (D) FREDMAN 103 PHILIPS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY & STANDARDS HINDENBURG, MAX F

3781 Ex Parte Denner et al 11476001 - (D) SMEGAL 102/103 Baker Botts LLP WEAVER, SUE A

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3661 Ex Parte Loera et al 11695261 - (D) HOELTER 112(1)/103 103 CARLSON, GASKEY & OLDS, P.C. KONG, SZE-HON

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3742 Ex Parte Schartner et al 11769261 - (D) SILVERMAN  103 103 41.50 112(2) QUARLES & BRADY LLP SINGH, AMIT K

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1645 Ex Parte Hunt 14215482 - (D) SMITH 101/double patenting ALLERGAN, INC. MINNIFIELD, NITA M

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2686 Ex Parte Houser et al 13635268 - (D) JEFFERY 112(2)/103 MOORE & VAN AT .TEN PLLC SHERWIN, RYAN W

Moreover, Simpson’s variable release position at least suggests a range of positions within the claimed range of open positions—an overlap triggering a presumption of obviousness. See Ormco Corp. v. Align Technology, Inc.,463 F.3d 1299, 1311 (Fed. Cir. 2006).

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3626 Ex Parte HANF et al 12651105 - (D) BAIN 101 SHOOK, HARDY & BACON L.L.P. (Cerner Corporation) HUNTER, SEAN KRISTOPHER

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3766 Ex Parte Rezai et al 13954181 - (D) CALVE 103/double patenting TAROLLI, SUNDHEIM, COVELL & TUMMINO L.L.P. WU, TONG E

alticor

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1767 Ex Parte SOUNIK et al 12132722 - (D) GARRIS 103 Covestro LLC GODENSCHWAGER, PETER F

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3649 Ex Parte Moessnang 12383831 - (D) JESCHKE 103 RROOKS KTTSHMAN P C HARMON, CHRISTOPHER R

We construe the limitation at issue to require that the “device” is capable of performing the recited functions—i.e., simultaneously (1) sealing the bag with the sealing bar, (2) venting the chamber, and (3) cutting the bag with the second cutting member to remove the neck of the bag. See Alticor Inc. v. Ultra-Sun Techs., Inc., 106 F. App’x 46, 47-48 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (construing “operable for” as “fit for or capable of’). Contrary to the Examiner’s position (Ans. 10), this language does limit the scope of the claim—namely, to structures capable of performing the recited functions. For the same reasons discussed above, the Examiner has not shown that the relied-upon prior art teaches a device capable of simultaneous cutting and sealing, as set forth among the recited functions.

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1631 Ex Parte Goddard et al 12944700 - (D) LEBOVITZ 101/103 Steinfl + Bruno LLP BORIN, MICHAEL L

1633 Ex Parte Caplan et al 10550590 - (D) ADAMS 103 TAROLLI, SUNDHEIM, COVELL & TUMMINO, LLP POPA, ILEANA

1651 Ex Parte Laughlin et al 11658065 - (D) FREDMAN 103 TAROLLI, SUNDHEIM, COVELL & TUMMINO, LLP KIM, TAEYOON

1678 Ex Parte Bergmann et al 10551298 - (D) LEBOVITZ 112/102/103 101/double patenting MILLEN, WHITE, ZELANO & BRANIGAN, P.C. FOSTER, CHRISTINE E

Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1721 Ex Parte WADA et al 13933918 - (D) DERRICK 103 OBLON, MCCLELLAND, MAIER & NEUSTADT, L.L.P. RODEE, CHRISTOPHER D

1786 Ex Parte Datta et al 12192823 - (D) DERRICK 103 EXXONMOBIL CHEMICAL COMPANY CHOI, PETER Y

1799 Ex Parte Cecchi 13066296 - (D) McGEE 103 WILLIAM W. JONES HURST, JONATHAN M

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2157 Ex Parte Sinclair et al 12979526 - (D) PER CURIAM 103 TERADATA US, INC. CHANNAVAJJALA, SRIRAMA T

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2864 Ex Parte HELLWIG 12171926 - (D) DERRICK 102 Schiff Hardin LLP Infineon Technologies AG RIVERA VARGAS, MANUEL A

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3622 Ex Parte Tischer 11638273 - (D) ENGLE 101 103 AT&T Legal Department - SZ IOSIF, MARIO CINCINAT

3628 Ex Parte VAKHUTINSKY et al 13235919 - (D) ENGLE 101 MILES & STOCKBRIDGE P.C. Oracle International Corporation ERB, NATHAN

3638 Ex Parte Saxena et al 11945231 - (D) O’HANLON 103 41.50 103 DLA PIPER LLP (US ) JUNGE, KRISTINA N S

3662 Ex Parte Thompson 14013913 - (D) CUTITTA 102/103 BROOKS KUSHMAN P.C./FGTL ALSOMIRI, MAJDI A

schulhauser

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 2600 Communications
2658 Ex Parte Shostak 12389762 - (D) ENGELS 102 DLA PIPER LLP (US) VILLENA, MARK

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1799 Ex Parte Rapp 13074936 - (D) ADAMS 103 Flocel Inc. MARCHESCHI, MICHAEL A

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2124 Ex Parte BARRY et al 13731396 - (D) CUTITTA 103 FAY KAPLUN & MARCIN, LLP FIGUEROA, KEVIN W

2183 Ex Parte Chung et al 12814025 - (D) DESHPANDE 103 Davidson Sheehan LLP Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. LINDLOF, JOHN M

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2838 Ex Parte Wolf 13054477 - (D) PER CURIAM 103 ANDREWS KURTH KENYON LLP GBLENDE, JEFFREY A

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3657 Ex Parte Guether 12000502 - (D) DIXON 103 MAIER & MAIER, PLLC WILLIAMS, THOMAS J

3663 Ex Parte Arcot et al 11455442 - (D) WINSOR 103 Lempia Summerfield Katz LLC/HERE MUSTAFA, IMRAN K

We note as an initial matter that claim 1 is directed to a “method of collecting traffic data” (Br. (Claims App’x) 18) (a “process” (35 U.S.C. § 101)) and that the argued limitation is a conditional step that is only performed “when the location reference code has changed,” which need not happen. According to our precedent, as a matter of claim construction, the broadest reasonable interpretation of claim 1 encompasses a method in which the argued limitation is not performed. See Ex parte Schulhauser, Appeal No. 2013-007847, 2016 WL 6277792, at *3-5 (PTAB Apr. 28, 2016) (precedential).

Independent claims 16 and 17 recite limitations similar to the argued limitation of claim 1 and are argued similarly to claim 1. Compare Br. 9—18, with Br. 6—9. Unlike claim 1, however, claims 16 and 17 are directed to a “navigation system used in a vehicle” (Br. (Claims App’x) 20) and a “probe  vehicle for collecting traffic data” (id. at 21) respectively, placing them in a different statutory class from claim 1, i.e., a “machine” or system rather than a “process” or method under 35 U.S.C. § 101. The broadest reasonable interpretation of such machine claims requires that structure and logic be provided to perform all recited functions, even those that are conditional. See Schulhauser, 2016 WL 6277792, at *6—7.

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3779 Ex Parte Kadykowski et al 13850429 - (D) FLAX 102/103 TERUMO CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS CORPORATION BOLER, RYNAE E

kao2, baxter travenol, merchant

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2163 Ex Parte LI et al 13309300 - (D) BUSCH 103 Vista IP Law Group, LLP (Oracle) BLACK, LINH

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2847 Ex Parte Brown et al 14310413 - (D) GUPTA 103 ULMER & BERNE LLP NGUYEN, CHAU N

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3646 Ex Parte Hyde et al 12462332 - (D) CALVE 102/103 HolzerlPLaw, PC BURKE, SEAN P

3688 Ex Parte McElfresh et al 13617647 - (D) CRAWFORD 101/112(2)/102/103 BGL/Yahoo Holdings STIBLEY, MICHAEL R

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3741 Ex Parte Moehrle et al 13241443 - (D) BROWN 112(4)/103 SIEMENS CORPORATION BURKE, THOMAS P

3749 Ex Parte Martinchick et al 12121832 - (D) HORNER 112(2)/101/103 MacMillan, Sobanski & Todd, LLC - GM DECKER, PHILLIP

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3727 Ex Parte Reindle et al 14175421 - (D) LANEY 112(1)/112(2)/103 103 Michael Best & Friedrich LLP (TTiFC) MULLER, BRYAN R

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1764 Ex Parte TAKAHASHI et al 12353689 - (D) PAK 103 HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP HUHN, RICHARD A

1771 Ex Parte Ravishankar et al 13056246 - (D) FRANKLIN 103 POLSINELLI PC OLADAPO, TAIWO

As such, we turn to Appellants’ evidence of criticality, and we agree with the Examiner’s stated position in the record that Appellants’ showing of unexpected results is not convincing because the comparison made must be with the closet prior art such as Brant.2 Ans. 12—13. “[W]hen unexpected results are used as evidence of nonobviousness, the results must be shown to be unexpected compared with the closest prior art.”Kao Corp. v. Unilever U.S., Inc., 441 F.3d 963, 970 (Fed. Cir. 2006) quotingIn Re Baxter Travenol Labs., 952 F.2d 388, 392 (Fed. Cir. 1991). As a general guideline, the closest prior art is the reference that has the most claim limitations in common with the invention, bearing in mind the relative importance of particular limitations.In re Merchant, 575 F.2d 865, 868 (CCPA 1978).
Baxter Travenol Labs., In re, 952 F.2d 388, 21 USPQ2d 1281 (Fed. Cir. 1991) 2131.01 , 2145

Merchant, In re, 575 F.2d 865, 197 USPQ 785 (CCPA 1978) 716.02(e)

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2461 Ex Parte Liu et al 14281124 - (D) SAADAT 103 SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP MATTIS, JASON E

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2875 Ex Parte Gibson III et al 14007336 - (D) SQUIRE 103 PHILIPS LIGHTING HOLDING B.V. HORIKOSHI, STEVEN Y

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3629 Ex Parte TROPP 13412233 - (D) FISCHETTI 103 112(1)/101 COOPER & DUNHAM, LLP JASMIN, LYNDA C

3637 Ex Parte Burgess et al 14531108 - (D) REPKO 103 STANDLEY LAW GROUP LLP ROERSMA, ANDREW MARK

3671 Ex Parte OHKUBO et al 14029497 - (D) MURPHY 103 DITTHAVONG & STEINER, P.C. MAYO-PINNOCK, TARA LEIGH

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3747 Ex Parte Hayman et al 13181981 - (D) CAPP 103 Cantor Colburn LLP-General Motors ZALESKAS, JOHNM

3753 Ex Parte Labrie et al 13103589 - (D) KERINS 102 CARLSON, GASKEY & OLDS, P.C. SANCHEZ-MEDINA, REINALDO

3761 Ex Parte Sutorius 13116992 - (D) SMEGAL 102/103 GREENBERG TRAURIG (LV) SASS, SARA A

3762 Ex Parte Polefko et al 13250283 - (D) COTTA 103 Pearne & Gordon LLP Greatbatch (QiG) LEVICKY, WILLIAM J

3778 Ex Parte Jafari et al 13059711 - (D) SHAH 102/103 101 Covidien LP BRYANT, ERIC C

wertheim, nett

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1632 Ex Parte Kinsella 13825542 - (D) MILLS 103 41.50 103 Bozicevic, Field & Francis LLP Rigel Pharmaceuticals, Inc. CHEN, SHIN LIN

Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1756 Ex Parte ZHOU 13310311 - (D) SMITH 103 KOPPEL, PATRICK, HEYBL & PHILPOTT WITTENBERG, STEFANIE S

1791 Ex Parte Johal et al 13370802 - (D) FRANKLIN 103 FITCH, EVEN, TABIN & FLANNERY, LLP DICUS, TAMRA

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3688 Ex Parte McElfresh et al 13614947 - (D) CRAWFORD 101/102/103 BGL/Yahoo Holdings STIBLEY, MICHAEL R

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1711 Ex Parte Bookbinder et al 12346088 - (D) KRATZ 103 112(1) CORNING INCORPORATED MARKOFF, ALEXANDER

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2477 Ex Parte BAILLARGEON 13442196 - (D) PER CURIAM 103 103 Patent Portfolio Builders, PLLC REDDIVALAM, SRINIVASA R

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3654 Ex Parte Thogersen et al 13420444 - (D) PESLAK 103 102/103 MAGINOT, MOORE & BECK, LLP CAMPOS, JR, JUAN J

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1744 Ex Parte Praller et al 13328295 - (D) PER CURIAM 112(1)/103 The Linde Group SHAFI, LEITH S

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3627 Ex Parte Sundaresan et al 12398950 - (D) SHAW 101 SCHWEGMAN LUNDBERG & WOESSNER/EBAY BUCHANAN, CHRISTOPHER R

REEXAMINATION

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1656 Ex parte BILLION KING INTERNATIONAL LTD., Patent Owner and Appellant Ex Parte 7989593 et al 13/083,639 90013510 - (D) ROBERTSON 103 HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP FOR THIRD-PARTY REQUESTER: Wood, Phillips, Katz, Clark & Mortimer DIAMOND, ALAN D original DESAI, ANAND U

REHEARING

DENIED
Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3683 Ex parte SIGNATURE SYSTEMS LLC, Patent Owner Ex Parte 8600807 et al 13/783,588 96000132 - (R) SIU 101 BARKUME & ASSOCIATES, P.C. WASSUM, LUKE S original MEINECKE DIAZ, SUSANNA M

Upon careful consideration of this issue, we agree with the Examiner that “[p]atentability decisions made during previous proceedings before the Office concerning the claims of any given patent have no bearing on patentability decisions made with respect to future proceedings concerning different patents having different claims.”  Ans. 5.  The Office, including the Board, must decide each case on its own merits, and the similarity of claims found patentable by another Examiner is not material to this proceeding.  See In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 264 (CCPA) (“it is immaterial in ex parte prosecution whether the same or similar claims have been allowed to others”); see also In re Nett Designs, 236 F.3d 1339, 1342 (Fed. Cir. 2001) (“The Board must decide each case on its own merits [and] the PTO’s allowance of prior registrations does not bind the Board or this court”).

Wertheim, In re, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976) 706.03(o) ,   1302.01 ,   2144.05 ,   2163 ,   2163.03 ,   2163.04 ,   2163.05

hewlett-packard, roberts, michlin

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3655 Ex Parte LIANG et al 14103882 - (D) YAP 103 BROOKS KUSHMAN P.C./FGTL DANG, TINH

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3736 Ex Parte Toth 13945244 - (D) MURPHY 103 WILSON, SONSINI, GOODRICH & ROSATI HOEKSTRA, JEFFREY GERBEN

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1787 Ex Parte Woychik et al 12061141 - (D) KRATZ 112(1)/102 112(2) GE GLOBAL PATENT OPERATION ROBINSON, ELIZABETH A

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1711 Ex Parte Grunert 12532203 - (D) ROSS 103 NIXON & VANDERHYE, PC CORMIER, DAVID G

We are not persuaded by Appellant’s argument and concur with the Examiner that the “configured to dispense the water . . . onto the component at a flow rate sufficient to clean accumulated contaminants off of the component” language of claim 30 is an intended use. Non-Final 5. It has long been held that “apparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does.”Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1468 (Fed. Cir. 1990). An inventor of a structure (machine or article of manufacture) is entitled to benefit from all of its uses, even those not described,Roberts v. Ryer, 91 U.S. 150, 157 (1875), and conversely, patentability of the structure cannot turn on the use or function of the structure,In re Michlin, 256 F.2d 317, 320 (CCPA 1958).

Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 15 USPQ2d 1525 (Fed. Cir. 1990) 2114

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3638 Ex Parte Avis 14032307 - (D) YAP 103 Carstens & Cahoon, LLP KIM, SHIN H

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3731 Ex Parte Bennett 12573176 - (D) O’HANLON 102/103 Covidien LP OU, JING RUI

3731 Ex Parte Collins et al 10986143 - (D) MILLS 102/103 LAW OFFICE OF LOUIS WOO MENDOZA, MICHAEL G

aquatex

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3647 Ex Parte Wood 12735536 - (D) WIEDER 102/103 NIXON & VANDERHYE, PC HAWK, STEVEN

 In view of the above, we are persuaded that the Examiner erred in determining that one of ordinary skill in the art would have understood the term “three dimensional shock bump” to simply mean a shock bump “having the dimensions of a height, a width and a depth.” (See Answer 3, emphasis omitted.) Indeed, the specification and cited references support that the term “three dimensional shock bump” has a special meaning to a person of ordinary skill in the art that would take the Examiner’s interpretation in this case beyond the broadest reasonable interpretation. See AquaTex Indus., Inc. v. Techniche Sols., 419 F.3d 1374, 1382 (Fed. Cir. 2005).

3657 Ex Parte Norman et al 13043554 - (D) HUGHES 102/103 Brooks Kushman P.C. / Meritor NGUYEN, VU Q

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1618 Ex Parte Li et al 12632686 - (D) JENKS 102/103 102 BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP DICKINSON, PAUL W

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1619 Ex Parte Storey et al 12706315 - (D) JENKS 102 SALIWANCHIK, LLOYD & EISENSCHENK KASSA, TIGABU

Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1785 Ex Parte Kohlweyer 11732778 - (D) SQUIRE 103 THE PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY REDDY, SATHAVARAM I

1789 Ex Parte Naumann 12375596 - (D) SQUIRE 103 ROHAN MATHFRS PIERCE, JEREMY R

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2631 Ex Parte Shan 11240252 - (D) COURTENAY 103 VOLPE AND KOENIG, P.C. MCKIE, GINA M

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3727 Ex Parte Kraemer 13323325 - (D) O’HANLON 103 MICHAEL BEST & FRIEDRICH LLP (Bosch) HORTON, ANDREW ALAN

3735 Ex Parte Christopherson et al 12992511 - (D) NEWMAN 103 DICKE, BILLIG & CZAJA CATINA, MICHAEL ANTHONY

3745 Ex Parte Strock et al 13236926 - (D) ASTORINO 103 CARLSON, GASKEY & OLDS/PRATT & WHITNEY BROWN, ADAM WAYNE

hill

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1783 Ex Parte Boquillon 13201567 - (D) HANLON 103 REINHART BOERNER VAN DEUREN P.C. VAN SELL, NATHAN L

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3711 Ex Parte Fair et al 12827870 - (D) FINAMORE 103 KILPATRICK TOWNSEND & STOCKTON LLP CEGIELNIK, URSZULA M

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3775 Ex Parte BAUMGARTNER 13351687 - (D) HUTCHINGS 102 102 Fay Kaplun & Marcin, LLP WAGGLE, JR, LARRY E

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1712 Ex Parte LIANG et al 13727767 - (D) FRANKLIN 103 Dority & Manning, PA and Guardian Industries Corp MELLOTT, JAMES M

To establish unexpected results over a claimed range, Appellants should compare a sufficient number of tests both inside and outside (i.e. as well as the upper and lower limits) the claimed range to show the criticality of the claimed range. In re Hill 284 F.2d 955 (CCPA 1960).

Hill, In re, 284 F.2d 955, 128 USPQ 197 (CCPA 1960) 716.02(d)

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2174 Ex Parte Guido et al 11839850 - (D) CHUNG 103 MOORE & VAN AT .TEN, PLLC For IBM NGUYEN, LE V

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2879 Ex Parte Van De Ven et al 11854750 - (D) TIMM 103 BURR & BROWN, PLLC STERN, JACOB R

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3663 Ex Parte Schmidt et al 12902406 - (D) McCARTNEY 103 Dinsmore & Shohl LLP MUSTAFA, IMRAN K

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3745 Ex Parte Loeffler 13710544 - (D) WARNER 112(1)/112(2) 112(1)/102 RENNER, OTTO, BOISSELLE & SKLAR, LLP LESLIE, MICHAEL S

3749 Ex Parte Venkatesan et al 13334265 - (D) BROWN 103 112(2) GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY SHIRSAT, VIVEK K

3772 Ex Parte QUINN 13418195 - (D) KORNICZKY 103 Richard C. Litman HARRIS, RAYMOND EUGENE

3779 Ex Parte GAVRIELY 13955008 - (D) SCHNEIDER 103 Faegre Baker Daniels LLP LEUBECKER, JOHN P

REEXAMINATION

REHEARING

DENIED
Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3733 DEPUY ORTHOPAEDICS, INC. Requester v. PUGET BIO VENTURES LLC Patent Owner Ex Parte 7,967,822 et al 10/977,365 95002152 - (R) MARTIN 103 PATTERSON THUENTE PEDERSEN, P.A. THIRD PARTY REQUESTER: BARNES & THORNBURG LLP (IN) WEHNER, CARY ELLEN original HOFFMAN, MARY C

linear

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1767 Ex Parte Joseph 14343958 - (D) COLAIANNI 103 DICKINSON WRIGHT PLLC KOLLIAS, ALEXANDER C

1797 Ex Parte Forrest et al 13235981 - (D) WILSON 102/103 Reising Ethington P.C. EOM, ROBERT J

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3733 Ex Parte Dell 12439088 - (D) O’HANLON 103 Fay Kaplun & Marcin, LLP ECKMAN, MICHELLE CHRISTINE

REHEARING

GRANTED
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2164 Ex Parte Gordon 12978647 - (D) LORIN 103 Collage Analytics LLC OHBA, MELLISSA M

The issue here is whether the informational content carried by the “first date” and “second date” elements of the claim necessarily must be the same. While two "dates" are required, the record does not support requiring them to be different values. Cf. Linear Technology Corp. v. International Trade Com'n, 566 F.3d 1049, 1055 (Fed. Cir. 2009):


We agree with the Commission's construction of “second circuit” and “third circuit,” defining the terms broadly to not require entirely separate and distinct circuits. Indeed, there is nothing in the claim language or specification that supports narrowly construing the terms to require a specific structural requirement or entirely distinct “second” and “third” circuits. Rather, the “second” and “third” circuits must only perform their stated functions.


We have considered the Appellant's arguments as to the construction of the claim phrases "first date" and "second date" but do not find them persuasive.
DENIED
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2174 Ex Parte Coutts 11836293 - (D) SZPONDOWSKI 103 CANTOR COLBURN LLP TILLERY, RASHAWN N

UMC

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1793 Ex Parte Wegwerth 13457818 - (D) DERRICK 102 41.50 103 HUGH WEGWERTH YOO, HONG THI

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1651 Ex Parte Winiski et al 14099416 - (D) SCHNEIDER 103 CARELLA, BYRNE, CECCHI, OLSTEIN, BRODY & AGNELLO CORDAS, EMILY ANN

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2616 Ex Parte Scott et al 12546266 - (D) BENNETT 103 BELZER PC GOOD JOHNSON, MOTILEWA

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2855 Ex Parte O’BRIEN 13673072 - (D) OGDEN 103 Maginot, Moore & Beck LLP CHAPMAN JR, JOHN E

The Examiner finds, and Appellant does not dispute, that “the level of skill in the accelerometer art is high: a person of ordinary skill would have had a full academic degree or equivalent experience in either mechanical or electrical engineering.” Answer 4–5 (citing UMC Electronics Co. v. U.S. , 8 Cl. Ct. 604, 617–18 (Ct. Cl. 1985), 228 USPQ 396, 401-402).

REHEARING

DENIED
Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3673 Ex Parte Nirmel 13068315 - (D) DOUGAL 103 CHITTARANJAN n. NIRMEL CUOMO, PETER M

REEXAMINATION

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3625 EBAY INC., Requester. v. KABBAGE, INC., Patent Owner Ex Parte 7983951 et al 12/436,642 95002370 - (D) BRANCH 102/103 MUSKIN & FARMER LLC THIRD PARTY REQUESTER: DENTONS US LLP RIMELL, SAMUEL G original AIRAPETIAN, MILA

swinehart

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3657 Ex Parte HIRANO 13728085 - (D) STEPHENS 103 NIXON & VANDERHYE, PC NGUYEN, XU AN LAN T

3665 Ex Parte Hannah et al 13907502 - (D) HOELTER 103 KNOBBE MARTENS OLSON & BEAR LLP MAWARI, REDHWAN K

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3711 Ex Parte Darlington et al 14142345 - (D) BROWNE 112(2)/102/103 REISING ETHINGTON P.C. KLAYMAN, AMIR ARIE

Noting that “the Examiner is attempting to impose a requirement that a dependent claim must recite ‘structure’ in addition to any functional limitations,” Appellants argue that “patent claims may define an invention functionally, i.e., by what it does.” Appeal Br. 7. Appellants are correct. We are unaware of any requirement that a dependent claim further define the structure of the claim from which it depends. Rather, “[t]here is nothing inherently wrong with defining some part of an invention in functional terms.” MPEP § 2173.05(g). Functional language does not, in and of itself, render a claim improper. In re Swinehart , 439 F. 2d 210, 212 (CCPA 1971).

Swinehart, In re, 439 F.2d 210, 169 USPQ 226 (CCPA 1971) 2114 , 2161.01 , 2173.01 , 2173.05(g) , 2183

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3742 Ex Parte MAUS et al 13548607 - (D) HILL 102/103 112(2) LERNER GREENBERG STEMER LLP ROSS, DANA

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2486 Ex Parte VLADIMIRSKY et al 12898969 - (D) MacDONALD 103 STERNE, KESSLER, GOLDSTEIN & FOX P.L.L.C. ANDERSON II, JAMES M

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2688 Ex Parte Tsoukatos et al 13961116 - (D) REPKO 103 HolzerlPLaw, P.C. EVANS, JEFFERSON A

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2894 Ex Parte Nandakumar et al 12817829 - (D) PRAISS 103 TEXAS INSTRUMENTS INCORPORATED LIGAI, MARIA

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3618 Ex Parte Lehti et al 13768301 - (D) SMEGAL 103 BrooksGroup VANAMAN, FRANK BENNETT

3628 Ex Parte THURLOW et al 12027792 - (D) HUME 101/103 Travelport VETTER, DANIEL

REHEARING

DENIED
Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3746 Ex Parte Arnold et al 11946653 - (R) KORNICZKY 102 HONEYWELL,/PANGRLE BOBISH, CHRISTOPHER S

fox

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 2600 Communications
2688 Ex Parte Gadbois et al 14050725 - (D) PYONIN 102/103 Hollingsworth Davis MILLER, BRIAN E

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3731 Ex Parte Saliman et al 13247892 - (D) PRATS 103 SHAY GLENN LLP TEMPLETON, CHRISTOPHER L

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1744 Ex Parte Hawkins 13279308 - (D) HANLON 102/103 102/103 Miller, Matthias & Hull LLP/ The Boeing Company LE, NINH V

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3735 Ex Parte Sebastian et al 12393537 - (D) MAJORS 102/103 double patenting Toering Patents PLLC TOTH, KAREN E

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1757 Ex Parte Cornfeld 13315877 - (D) COLAIANNI 103/double patenting SolAero Technologies Corp. PILLAY, DEVINA

1792 Ex Parte JACOBSON et al 13419505 - (D) KRATZ 103 AMIN, TUROCY & WATSON, LLP WILLIAMS, LELA

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2196 Ex Parte McConaughy et al 13838653 - (D) POTHIER 103 Greg Goshorn, P.C. KIM, SISLEY NAHYUN

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2649 Ex Parte MASUDA et al 13731686 - (D) McMILLIN 103 OBLON, MCCLELLAND, MAIER & NEUSTADT, L.L.P. LIAO, HSINCHUN

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3623 Ex Parte Graupner et al 13415814 - (D) HOMERE 101/103 Hewlett Packard Enterprise ELKASSABGI, ZAHRA

3623 Ex Parte Rangaswamy et al 13671221 - (D) CUTITTA 101/102 Jones Day For SAP YOUNG, ASHLEY YA-SHEH

3628 Ex Parte Keene 13912427 - (D) PINKERTON 101 SCHMEISER, OLSEN & WATTS ERB, NATHAN

3633 Ex Parte NOWLING 14317618 - (D) AMUNDSON 103 THOMTE LAW OFFICE, L.L.C. MATTEI, BRIAN DAVID

3661 Ex Parte Santori et al 14189037 - (D) MacDONALD 102/103 BROOKS KUSHMAN P.C./FGTL NOLAN, PETER D

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3732 Ex Parte Dolfi et al 12674520 - (D) KORNICZKY 103 103/double patenting MCGLEW & TUTTLE, PC O'DONNELL, JUSTIN R

3735 Ex Parte Pittman et al 13263084 - (D) MURPHY 103 PHILIPS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY & STANDARDS WEARE, MEREDITH H

As discussed above, the Appellants do not establish that the Examiner errs in determining that the prior art teaches the adjustment of the lung compliance threshold based on the percentage of Cheyne-Stokes respiration. Thus, for the purposes of this appeal, we treat as admitted fact that the prior art teaches an evaluation of the percentage of Cheyne-Stokes respiration to determine whether adjustment of the lung compliance threshold is warranted.In re Fox, 471 F.2d 1405, 1407 (CCPA 1973) (“In this court [or before the board, because] appellant has not denied the existence of the facts on which the examiner rested his obviousness rejection nor the added facts of which the board took judicial notice,” we accept them as accurate.).

Fox, In re, 471 F.2d 1405, 176 USPQ 340 (CCPA 1973) 2144.03

3762 Ex Parte Sheldon et al 12913400 - (D) TOWNSEND 103 Medtronic, Inc. PHAM, MINH DUC GIA

OPQA Ex Parte Sink et al 12043055 - (D) COURTENAY 101 Thompson Hine LLP JUNG, ALLEN J

REHEARING

DENIED
Tech Center 2600 Communications
2623 Ex Parte Hickman 14075646 - (R) Per Curiam 103 Bose Corporation PATEL, PREMAL R