baird, jones, merck2, williamson

custom search

REVERSED 
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1625 Ex Parte WATANABE et al 13081353 - (D) MILLS 103 ANTONELLI, TERRY, STOUT & KRAUS, LLP O DELL, DAVID K

1648 Ex Parte Saffran 11052204 - (D) ADAMS 103 DICKSTEIN SHAPIRO LLP FOLEY, SHANON A

Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1735 Ex Parte Liu et al 11567525 - (D) HANLON 103 SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP IP, SIKYIN

see also In re Baird, 16 F.3d 380, 382 (Fed. Cir. 1994) (“The fact that a claimed compound may be encompassed by a disclosed generic formula does not by itself render that compound obvious.”); In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 350 (Fed. Cir. 1992) (declining to extract from Merck & Co. v. Biocraft Labs., Inc., 874 F.2d 804, 806-09 (Fed. Cir. 1989), the rule that “regardless of how broad, a disclosure of a chemical genus renders obvious any species that happens to fall within it”).

Baird, In re, 16 F.3d 380, 29 USPQ2d 1550 (Fed. Cir. 1994) 2144.05 , 2144.08 , 2163

Jones, In re, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992) 707.07(f) , 2143.01 , 2144 , 2144.05 , 2144.08

Merck & Co. v. Biocraft Laboratories, 874 F.2d 804, 10 USPQ2d 1843 (Fed. Cir. 1989)  716.02(a) ,  2123 ,  2144.05 ,  2144.08

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2881 Ex Parte Wong et al 11957084 - (D) KRATZ 102/103 VISTA IP LAW GROUP LLP MCCORMACK, JASON L

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3676 Ex Parte LOWDON et al 12570030 - (D) GOODSON 102/103 SCHLUMBERGER OILFIELD SERVICES BOMAR, THOMAS S

This claim interpretation is consistent with a recent decision from the Federal Circuit concerning a “module” claim term. See Williamson v. Citrix Online, LLC, 770 F.3d 1371, 1377–80 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 5, 2014) (holding that district court erred in concluding that “distributed learning control module” is a means-plus-function claim term).

AFFIRMED 
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1671 Ex Parte Hansen et al 12471528 - (D) POLLOCK 103 BAYER MATERIAL SCIENCE LLC SAWYER, JENNIFER C

Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1744 Ex Parte Liu et al 12043850 - (D) DERRICK 103 Tokyo Electron U.S. Holdings, Inc. GRUN, ROBERT J

1787 Ex Parte Sano et al 12083525 - (D) ANKENBRAND 112(1)/103 BGL/Ann Arbor SHOSHO, CALLIE E

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2159 Ex Parte Zeller et al 10315264 - (D) FISHMAN 112(1)/103 HOFFMAN WARNICK LLC CASANOVA, JORGE A

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2452 Ex Parte Mulligan et al 10043936 - (D) FETTING 103 Ditthavong & Steiner, P.C. DOAN, DUYEN MY

2468 Ex Parte Ben-Ezra et al 11972650 - (D) SAADAT 103 SUGHRUE MION PLLC USPTO CUSTOMER NO WITH IBM/SVL WAQAS, SAAD A

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2644 Ex Parte Syrbe 10539170 - (D) MORGAN 103 Ditthavong & Steiner, P.C. CASCA, FRED A

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2811 Ex Parte Stahl et al 12001531 - (D) McGRAW 102 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 102 KENYON & KENYON LLP WEBB, VERNON P

2812 Ex Parte Liu et al 11036081 - (D) HOUSEL 103 THE ECLIPSE GROUP LLP ISAAC, STANETTA D

2842 Ex Parte KNOBLINGER et al 12543637 - (D) NAGUMO 103 SpryIP, LLC IFX CHANG, JOSEPH

2842 Ex Parte KNOBLINGER et al 12543629 - (D) NAGUMO 103 SpryIP, LLC IFX CHANG, JOSEPH

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3647 Ex Parte Frederickson 12123420 - (D) STEPINA 102/103 Carlson, Gaskey, & Olds, P.C./Sikorsky BENEDIK, JUSTIN M

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3711 Ex Parte Endo et al 11172793 - (D) JESCHKE 103 Birch, Stewart, Kolasch & Birch, LLP GORDEN, RAEANN

3723 Ex Parte Liu 12002436 - (D) MAYBERRY 112(2)/103 MAGINOT, MOORE & BECK, LLP MORGAN, EILEEN P

3731 Ex Parte Tsai 12258339 - (D) POLLOCK 103 Knobbe, Martson, Olson & Bear LLP ALEMAN, SARAH WEBB

REEXAMINATION

AFFIRMED 
Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3632 JAC-RACK, INC. Requester v. UNIRAC, INC. Patent Owner, Appellant Ex Parte Liebendorfer et al 7,260,918 10/116,384 95001727 - (D) SONG 103 CROWELL & MORING LLP Third Party Requester: HARNESS DICKEY & PIERCE, P.L.C. CLARKE, SARA SACHIE original KING, ANITA M

prima tek

custom search

REVERSED 
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1734 Ex Parte Krone et al 12378672 - (D) KAISER 103 ECKERT SEAMANS CHERIN & MELLOTT, LLC FELTON, AILEEN BAKER

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2159 Ex Parte Joshi et al 12208973 - (D) MacDONALD 103 STEVENS & SHOWALTER, L.L.P. CONYERS, DAWAUNE A

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2817 Ex Parte Lin et al 12758040 - (D) HOUSEL 112(1) Jackson Intellectual Property Group PLLC CAO, PHAT X

2897 Ex Parte Purushothaman et al 12615175 - (D) LEBOVITZ 103 THE LAW OFFICES OF ROBERT J. EICHELBURG BRADFORD, PETER

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3653 Ex Parte WARDAK et al 12775522 - (D) WORTH 103 Leydig, Voit & Mayer, Ltd. (Frankfurt office) GONZALEZ, LUIS A

3671 Ex Parte Connors et al 12608375 - (D) MOORE 103 CNH Industrial America LLC MCGOWAN, JAMIE LOUISE

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3725 Ex Parte Friedl 12247307 - (D) OSINSKI 103 FISH & TSANG LLP LEWIS, JUSTIN V

3777 Ex Parte Sanjay-Gopal et al 10572776 - (D) WIEKER 102/103 PHILIPS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY & STANDARDS ROY, BAISAKHI

AFFIRMED-IN-PART 
Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2448 Ex Parte Simongini et al 12060739 - (D) JURGOVAN 102/103 102/103 BGL/Accenture - Chicago BRINKS GILSON & LIONE EDWARDS, JAMES A

2461 Ex Parte PEETERS et al 12463935 - (D) WINSOR 102/103 101/112(2)/102/103 STERNE, KESSLER, GOLDSTEIN & FOX P.L.L.C. LEVITAN, DMITRY

2475 Ex Parte Monga et al 12096229 - (D) WHITEHEAD JR. 102 102 Schmeiser, Olsen & Watts LLP PREVAL, LIONEL

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2811 Ex Parte Park 11166145 - (D) TIMM 102 102 H.C. PARK & ASSOCIATES, PLC NADAV, ORI

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3718 Ex Parte Berube 11589083 - (D) HOFFMANN 102 102 NORTON ROSE FULBRIGHT CANADA LLP ROWLAND, STEVE

AFFIRMED 
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2123 Ex Parte Kelley et al 11863417 - (D) MORGAN 103 ADDMG - Harris JACOB, MARY C

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2457 Ex Parte Kahari et al 11017492 - (D) MEDLOCK 103 Ditthavong & Steiner, P.C. SALL, EL HADJI MALICK

There is a heavy presumption that claim terms take on their “plain, ordinary, and accustomed meaning to one of ordinary skill in the relevant art.” See Prima Tek II, L.L.C. v. Polypap, S.A.R.L., 318 F.3d 1143, 1148 (Fed. Cir. 2003). Appellants may overcome that presumption by acting as their own lexicographer so as to assign a special definition to each claim term. But such a definition must be “clearly set forth” and “explicit.” Id.

2467 Ex Parte Rodrigo 10569780 - (D) BEAMER 103 NELSON MULLINS RILEY & SCARBOROUGH LLP EBRAHIM, ANEZ C

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2649 Ex Parte Dunn et al 11558841 - (D) BEAMER 102/103 KYOCERA INTERNATIONAL INC. HANNON, CHRISTIAN A

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3671 Ex Parte Reimers et al 11744662 - (D) HOSKINS 103 Polster, Lieder, Woodruff & Lucchesi, L.C. TORRES, ALICIA M

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3731 Ex Parte Ward et al 10899807 - (D) LaVIER 103 BGL SIMPSON, SARAH A

3732 Ex Parte DeSimone et al 10963147 - (D) WIEKER 103 MYERS BIGEL SIBLEY & SAJOVEC PATEL, YOGESH P

REEXAMINATION

AFFIRMED-IN-PART 
Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2835 SUPERIOR COMMUNICATIONS, INC. Requester and Cross Appellant v. VOLTSTAR TECHNOLOGIES, INC. Patent Owner and Appellant Ex Parte 7910833 et al 12/127,592 95002365 - (S) BAUMEISTER 102/103 102/103 37 C.F.R. § 41.77(a) 102/103 Schneider Rothman IP Law Group Third Party Requester: Snell & Wilmer MENEFEE, JAMES A original MAYO III, WILLIAM H

wrigley, seattle box, planet bingo

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2871 Ex Parte Shives et al 11223804 - (D) PAK 103 WADDEY & PATTERSON, P.C. RUDE, TIMOTHY L

2871 Ex Parte Shives et al 11167935 - (D) PAK 103 WADDEY & PATTERSON, P.C. RUDE, TIMOTHY L

2871 Ex Parte Shives et al 11225491 - (D) PAK 103 WADDEY & PATTERSON, P.C. RUDE, TIMOTHY L

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1628 Ex Parte Disse et al 11468871 - (D) POLLOCK 103 BOEHRINGER INGELHEIM USA CORPORATION SZNAIDMAN, MARCOS L

1655 Ex Parte Sun 11726603 - (D) PAULRAJ 103 MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP HOFFMAN, SUSAN COE

In other words, Appellant has not demonstrated that the addition of phytoestrogen to the prior art mung bean/Lentinus edodes extract composition resulted in an unexpected improvement in the treatment of NSCLC. See Wm. Wrigley Jr. Co. v. Cadbury Adams USA LLC, 683 F.3d 1356, 1362 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (“Evidence that a combination of known components results in an effect greater than the predicted additive effect of the components can support a finding of nonobviousness.”)(Emphasis added.)

1662 Ex Parte Carozzi et al 10782141 - (D) GRIMES 103 Bayer CropScience LP Athenix Corp. KUBELIK, ANNE R

1662 Ex Parte Carozzi et al 10782096 - (D) GRIMES 103 Bayer CropScience LP Athenix Corp. KUBELIK, ANNE R

1662 Ex Parte Carozzi et al 10783417 - (D) GRIMES 103 Bayer CropScience LP Athenix Corp. KUBELIK, ANNE R

1662 Ex Parte Carozzi et al 10782570 - (D) GRIMES 103 Bayer CropScience LP Athenix Corp. KUBELIK, ANNE R

Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1786 Ex Parte MUELLER et al 12061832 - (D) ROESEL 112(2)/103 Pearne & Gordon LLP CHOI, PETER Y

When a word of degree, such as “substantially,” is used in a claim, we must determine whether the Specification provides some standard for measuring that degree. Seattle Box Company, Inc. v. Industrial Crating & Packing, Inc., 731 F.2d 818, 826 (Fed. Cir. 1984) (addressing whether claim term “substantially equal” is indefinite).

Seattle Box Co. v. Industrial Crating & Packing, Inc., 731 F.2d 818, 221 USPQ 568 (Fed. Cir. 1984) 2173.05(b)

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2198 Ex Parte Galli 09870223 - (D) MacDONALD 112(1)/102/103 SCHMEISER, OLSEN & WATTS KANG, INSUN

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2622 Ex Parte Kuraoka et al 11245356 - (D) SAADAT 103 OBLON, SPIVAK, MCCLELLAND MAIER & NEUSTADT, L.L.P. YODICHKAS, ANEETA

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2894 Ex Parte Hackitt et al 11440609 - (D) LEBOVITZ obviousness-type double patenting/102/103 INTEL CORPORATION c/o CPA Global LAURENZI, MARK A

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3633 Ex Parte Struecker 12708198 - (D) BAHR 103 ZARLEY LAW FIRM P.L.C. MATTEI, BRIAN DAVID

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3714 Ex Parte Knight 10861849 - (D) GERSTENBLITH 103 101 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 101/112(2) Andrew Knight COBURN, CORBETT B

see also Planet Bingo, LLC v. VKGS LLC, 576 Fed. Appx. 1005, 1008 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (holding the claims ineligible even though they “require[d] ‘a computer with a central processing unit,’ ‘a memory,’ ‘an input and output terminal,’ ‘a printer,’ [and] in some cases ‘a video screen’”).16

16 Although nonprecedential, Planet Bingo is persuasive. Fed. Cir. R. 32.1; see Fed. R. App. Pro. 32.1(a).

3714 Ex Parte Knight 10869082 - (D) GERSTENBLITH 103 101 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 101/112(2) Andrew Knight COBURN, CORBETT B

3714 Ex Parte Knight 10846544 - (D) GERSTENBLITH 103 101 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 101/112(2) Andrew Knight COBURN, CORBETT B

3714 Ex Parte Knight 10722473 - (D) GERSTENBLITH 103 101 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 101/112(2) Andrew Knight COBURN, CORBETT B

3746 Ex Parte Wagner 11800092 - (D) GOODSON 102/103 ABELMAN, FRAYNE & SCHWAB LETTMAN, BRYAN MATTHEW

sneed, orthopedic, andersen, nievelt

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3752 Ex Parte Miller et al 12407136 - (D) MURPHY 102 Carlson, Gaskey & Olds/Masco Corporation KIM, CHRISTOPHER S

AFFIRMED-IN-PART 
Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2497 Ex Parte Pepperell 11515631 - (D) WEINBERG 103 103 OBLON, SPIVAK, MCCLELLAND MAIER & NEUSTADT, L.L.P. RASHID, HARUNUR

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2673 Ex Parte Rolleston 11001431 - (D) SCHOPFER 103 103 Basch & Nickerson LLP RUDOLPH, VINCENT M

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2817 Ex Parte Manning 11492138 - (D) LEBOVITZ 103 102/103 FLETCHER YODER SMITH, BRADLEY

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3636 Ex Parte Bruns et al 12754752 - (D) GERSTENBLITH 103 103 STEVENS & SHOWALTER LLP NELSON JR, MILTON

AFFIRMED 
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2111 Ex Parte Bandholz et al 12135305 - (D) SHAW 102/103 IBM (RPS-BKLS) c/o Biggers Kennedy Lenart Spraggins LLP DALEY, CHRISTOPHER ANTHONY

2139 Ex Parte LIU et al 12333022 - (D) MacDONALD 103 Leydig, Voit & Mayer, Ltd (for Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd) BANSAL, GURTEJ

2158 Ex Parte Koch et al 11760483 - (D) JURGOVAN 112(1)/102 KENYON & KENYON LLP SHANMUGASUNDARAM, KANNAN

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2614 Ex Parte Moore et al 10883993 - (D) DIXON 103 DAVIDSON BERQUIST JACKSON & GOWDEY LLP RICHER, AARON M

2648 Ex Parte Karaoguz et al 11039020 - (D) WHITEHEAD JR. 103 BGL/Broadcom SHARMA, SUJATHA R

2669 Ex Parte Kaus et al 11573290 - (D) DILLON 102/103 PHILIPS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY & STANDARDS MOTSINGER, SEAN T

We find the Examiner’s position persuasive. "[I]t 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 (citing Orthopedic Equip. Co. v. United States, 702 F.2d 1005, 1013 (Fed. Cir. 1983); In re Andersen, 391 F.2d 953, 958 (CCPA 1968)); see also In re Nievelt, 482 F.2d 965, 968 (CCPA 1973) ("Combining the teachings of references does not involve an ability to combine their specific structures.").

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

Orthopedic Equip. Co., Inc. v. All Orthopedic Appliances, Inc., 707 F.2d 1376, 217 USPQ 1281 (Fed. Cir. 1983) 716.04

Nievelt, In re, 482 F.2d 965, 179 USPQ 224 (CCPA 1973) 2145

2683 Ex Parte Buck et al 12041746 - (D) DIXON 103 HAMILTON, DESCANCTIS & CHA (GENERAL) SAMSON, SARA B

2689 Ex Parte Adams 11955455 - (D) FRAHM 103 PERRY + CURRIER INC. (FOR RIM) TERRELL, EMILY C

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2857 Ex Parte Chauncey et al 11512535 - (D) DELMENDO 103 Harness, Dickey & Pierce, P.L.C. SCHECHTER, ANDREW M

2881 Ex Parte Muntean et al 12277198 - (D) OWENS 103 Agilent Technologies, Inc. in care of: CPA Global CHANG, HANWAY

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3726 Ex Parte Mayabb 11709018 - (D) HOELTER 103 Kinney & Lange, P.A. KOEHLER, CHRISTOPHER M

REHEARING

DENIED
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2177 Ex Parte Atkin 11463131 - (D) HOMERE 103 IBM CORPORATION (RHF) C/O ROBERT H. FRANTZ HUYNH, THU V

REEXAMINATION

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2817 XILINX, INC. Requester v. INTELLECTUAL VENTURES MANAGEMENT Patent Owner and Appellant Ex Parte GABARA et al 7,429,899 11/697,908 95001628 - (D) CURCURI 112(1)/102/103 NDQ Special Reexam Group Third Party Requester: Haynes & Boone, LLP Deb, Anjan original MIS, DAVID C

e-pass

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2884 Ex Parte Chiyoma et al 12782074 - (D) HASTINGS 103 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman, LLP (NV) LEE, SHUN K

AFFIRMED-IN-PART 
Tech Center 2600 Communications
2645 Ex Parte Nádas et al 12516237 - (D) ENGELS 103 103 COATS & BENNETT, PLLC ADDY, ANTHONY S

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3657 Ex Parte Lloyd 12253527 - (D) WOODS 103 103 Brooks Kushman P.C. / Meritor SCHWARTZ, CHRISTOPHER P

AFFIRMED 
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1771 Ex Parte Respini et al 12024251 - (D) GARRIS 103 Mossman, Kumar and Tyler, PC STEIN, MICHELLE

2166 Ex Parte Chen et al 11230446 - (D) FRAHM 101/102 CRGO LAW STEVEN M. GREENBERG LO, ANN J

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2448 Ex Parte Midgley et al 11280111 - (D) MOORE 103 Ojanen Law Offices EMDADI, KEYVAN

Limitations appearing in the specification but not recited in the claims are not read into the claims unless the Patentee either acted as a lexicographer by “imbu[ing] the claim terms with a particular meaning,” or “disavowed or disclaimed scope of coverage, by using words or expressions of manifest exclusion or restriction.” E-Pass Techs., Inc. v. 3Com Corp., 343 F.3d 1364, 1368-69 (Fed. Cir. 2003) (citation and internal quotations omitted).

E-Pass Techs., Inc. v. 3Com Corp., 343 F.3d 1364, 67 USPQ2d 1947 (Fed. Cir. 2003) 2111.01

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3672 Ex Parte THEMIG 12249602 - (D) HOELTER 102/103 OBLON, SPIVAK, MCCLELLAND MAIER & NEUSTADT, L.L.P. BAGNELL, DAVID J

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3711 Ex Parte Grasso 12818447 - (D) GREENHUT 112(1)/103 Frank J. Grasso PIERCE, WILLIAM M

3726 Ex Parte Anderson et al 11714750 - (D) OSINSKI 103 Kinney & Lange, P.A. WILENSKY, MOSHE K

3781 Ex Parte Monmany 11670865 - (D) HOELTER 103 112(1)/112(2) HUNTON & WILLIAMS LLP MATHEW, FENN C

ngai, gulack, lowry, curry, mathias

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3621 Ex Parte Morgan 10979014 - (D) WIEDER 103 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY ZELASKIEWICZ, CHRYSTINA E

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 2600 Communications
2651 Ex Parte Kallio et al 13411189 - (D) COURTENAY 102 Nokia Corporation and Alston & Bird LLP MONIKANG, GEORGE C

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3616 Ex Parte Zuge et al 12010930 - (D) BROWNE 103 Novak Druce Connolly Bove + Quigg LLP DICKSON, PAUL N

3682 Ex Parte Stefanik et al 12235159 - (D) BAHR 103 AT&T Legal Department - G&G MYHRE, JAMES W

Our reviewing court has held that nonfunctional descriptive material cannot lend patentability to an otherwise unpatentable invention. In re Ngai, 367 F.3d 1336, 1339 (Fed. Cir. 2004); cf. In re Gulack, 703 F.2d 1381, 1385 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (when descriptive material is not functionally related to the substrate, the descriptive material will not distinguish the invention from the prior art in terms of patentability). ...

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

Gulack, In re, 703 F.2d 1381, 217 USPQ 401 (Fed. Cir. 1983) 2112.01

Unlike the data structures in In re Lowry, 32 F.3d 1579 (Fed. Cir. 1994), the user information of Appellants’ invention does not “provide increased efficiency in computer operation[s].” See Lowry, 32 F.3d at 1580, 1584; cf. Ex parte Curry, 84 USPQ2d 1272, 1274–75 (BPAI 2005) (informative) (discussing computer-related situations involving nonfunctional descriptive material); Ex parte Mathias, 84 USPQ2d 1276, 1279 (BPAI 2005) (informative) (same).

Lowry, In re, 32 F.3d 1579, 32 USPQ2d 1031 (Fed. Cir. 1994) 2111.05

3686 Ex Parte Jung et al 11906112 - (D) PRAISS 112(1)/112(2)/101/102/103 Constellation Law Group, PLLC PATEL, NEHA

3686 Ex Parte Jung et al 11904016 - (D) PRAISS 112(2)/101/102/103 Constellation Law Group, PLLC PATEL, NEHA

3686 Ex Parte Jung et al 11524084 - (D) PRAISS 101/102/103 Constellation Law Group, PLLC PATEL, NEHA

EWP

custom search

REVERSED 
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1613 Ex Parte Young et al 10714719 - (D) FREDMAN 103 ROBERTS MLOTKOWSKI SAFRAN & COLE, P.C. FUBARA, BLESSING M

Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1727 Ex Parte Min et al 11346420 - (D) WILSON 112(1)/103 CHRISTIE, PARKER & HALE, LLP ARCIERO, ADAM A

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2456 Ex Parte Ukis 11142313 - (D) STEPHENS 103 HARNESS, DICKEY & PIERCE, P.L.C. TRAN, JIMMY H

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2842 Ex Parte Roozeboom et al 12790362 - (D) ABRAHAM 102 NXP B.V. WELLS, KENNETH B

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3646 Ex Parte LU et al 12102123 - (D) CALVE 112(2)/102/103 WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY, LLC O'CONNOR, MARSHALL P

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1765 Ex Parte Chatterjee et al 11864176 - (D) HOUSEL 112(1) 102/103 CANTOR COLBURN LLP - SABIC (LEXAN/CYCOLOY) BUTTNER, DAVID J

1793 Ex Parte Sanchez et al 11932111 - (D) GARRIS 103 103 BANNER & WITCOFF, LTD. YOO, HONG THI

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2684 Ex Parte Ieda et al 11898342 - (D) FRAHM 103 103 BUCHANAN, INGERSOLL & ROONEY PC BURGDORF, STEPHEN R

EWP Corp. v. Reliance Universal Inc., 755 F.2d 898, 907 (Fed. Cir.) cert. denied, 474 U.S. 843 (1985) (“A reference must be considered for everything it teaches by way of technology and is not limited to the particular invention it is describing[.]”).

EWP Corp. v. Reliance Universal, Inc., 755 F.2d 898, 225 USPQ 20 (Fed. Cir. 1985) 716.03(b)

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3689 Ex Parte Pramer et al 11699211 - (D) CHERRY 102/103 102/103 BRINKS GILSON & LIONE BGL/Accenture - Chicago ARAQUE JR, GERARDO

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1615 Ex Parte Gale et al 11487060 - (D) McCOLLUM 103 SQUIRE PATTON BOGGS (US) LLP HELM, CARALYNNE E

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2169 Ex Parte HINTON et al 11458845 - (D) MCMILLIN 103 IBM CORP. (DHJ) c/o DAVID H. JUDSON HU, JENSEN

2193 Ex Parte Gammel et al 11008585 - (D) DANG 103 Infineon Technologies AG c/o Schiff Hardin LLP YAARY, MICHAEL D

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2696 Ex Parte Wang et al 11768193 - (D) DIXON 103 McClure, Qualey & Rodack, LLP CRAWLEY, KEITH L

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2842 Ex Parte Ali et al 11752073 - (D) NAGUMO 112(1) 103 Silicon Image/FENWICK JONES, STEPHEN E

2878 Ex Parte Meijer et al 12446482 - (D) GARRIS 103/obviousness-type double patenting PHILIPS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY & STANDARDS CHAVEZ, RENEE D

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3766 Ex Parte Colvin et al 12767056 - (D) FREDMAN 103 Boston Scientific Neuromodulation Corp. c/o Lowe Graham Jones HELLER, TAMMIE K

REHEARING

GRANTED
Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3773 Ex Parte Zaver et al 11729324 - (D) PAULRAJ 103 Covidien LP/Shumaker & Sieffert P.A. ORKIN, ALEXANDER J

REEXAMINATION

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3742 C. CRETORS AND COMPANY Requester, Cross-Appellant, Respondent v. GOLD MEDAL PRODUCTS CO. Patent Owner, Appellant, Respondent Ex Parte 7,874,244 B2 et al 10/560,540 95000665 - (D) SONG 102/103 WOOD, HERRON & EVANS, LLP THIRD PART REQUESTER: PERKINS COIE LLP FETSUGA, ROBERT M original ALEXANDER, REGINALD

REHEARING

GRANTED
3733 BIOMET ORTHOPEDICS, LLC and BIOMET MANUFACTURING CORPORATION Third Party Requester, Cross-Appellant v. HUDSON SURGICAL DESIGN, INC. Patent Owner, Appellant Ex Parte 7344541 et al 10/756,817 95001469 - (D) MARTIN 112(1)/102 PATTERSON, THUENTE, SKAAR & CHRISTENSEN, P.A Third Party Requester: Troutman Sanders, LLP REIP, DAVID OWEN original HOFFMAN, MARY C

schreiber, giannelli

custom search

REVERSED 
Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3675 Ex Parte Berger 11804303 - (D) STEPINA 103 ABELMAN, FRAYNE & SCHWAB LUGO, CARLOS

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3737 Ex Parte Henry 11594415 - (D) LaVIER 103 BRINKS GILSON & LIONE HUNTLEY, DANIEL CARROLL

Although claims directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function, to satisfy the functional limitations in an apparatus claim, the prior art apparatus must be capable of performing the claimed function. See In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d 1473, 1478 (Fed. Cir. 1997). In addition, the mere capability of performing the claimed function is not the complete inquiry; the Examiner should additionally determine whether it would have been obvious to modify the prior art system to arrive at the claimed system. See In re Giannelli, 739 F.3d 1375, 1380 (Fed. Cir. 2014). As “[p]hysical capability alone does not render obvious that which is contraindicated,” id., the Examiner’s assessment that Moehring is “capable of” the functions recited in claim 1, (Ans. 11), is insufficient in view of our conclusion that Moehring teaches away from those very functions.

Schreiber, In re, 128 F.3d 1473, 44 USPQ2d 1429 (Fed. Cir. 1997) 2111.02 , 2112 , 2114

3771 Ex Parte Burbank et al 12396358 - (D) REIMERS 103 CROCKETT & CROCKETT, P.C. LOUIS, LATOYA M

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2163 Ex Parte COPPOLA et al 12204193 - (D) SHAW 102/103 IBM CORPORATION HWA, SHYUE JIUNN

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2424 Ex Parte Sridhar et al 12061525 - (D) JURGOVAN 103 CAPITOL PATENT & TRADEMARK LAW FIRM, PLLC BROWN, RUEBEN M

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2829 Ex Parte Egitto et al 11976629 - (D) TIMM 103 HINMAN, HOWARD & KATTELL, LLP ARROYO, TERESA M

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3635 Ex Parte Berridge 11978883 - (D) REIMERS 103 LAW OFFICES OF CHRISTOPHER L. MAKAY ADAMOS, THEODORE V

alice, mayo, ultramercial

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1779 Ex Parte Werner et al 12158558 - (D) WARREN 103 Barnes & Thornburg LLP (Roche) JARRETT, LORE RAMILLANO

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3711 Ex Parte Tinti 12387853 - (D) KERINS 103 James E. Curry GRAHAM, MARK S

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1726 Ex Parte Olbrich et al 12306853 - (D) FRANKLIN 103 Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP (WM) TAKEUCHI, YOSHITOSHI

1771 Ex Parte Iyer et al 12784696 - (D) PAK 103 MENDELSOHN, DRUCKER, & DUNLEAVY, P.C. GRAHAM, CHANTEL LORAN

1792 Ex Parte Bekele 12828461 - (D) NAGUMO 103 SEALED AIR CORPORATION THAKUR, VIREN A

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2898 Ex Parte Yamazaki et al 12076994 - (D) WARREN 103 Robinson Intellectual Property Law Office, P.C. SHOOK, DANIEL P

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3711 Ex Parte Levin 10787486 - (D) BROWNE 101 GRACE J FISHEL COLLINS, DOLORES R

The Supreme Court has set forth “a framework for distinguishing patents that claim laws of nature, natural phenomena, and abstract ideas from those that claim patent-eligible applications of those concepts.” Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int'l., 134 S. Ct. 2347, 2355 (2014) (citing Mayo Collaborative Servs. v. Prometheus Labs, Inc., 132 S. Ct. 1289, 1294 (2012). According to the Supreme Court’s framework, we must first determine whether the claims at issue are directed to one of those concepts (i.e., laws of nature, natural phenomena, and abstract ideas). Id. If so, we must secondly “consider the elements of each claim both individually and ‘as an ordered combination’ to determine whether the additional elements ‘transform the nature of the claim’ into a patent-eligible application.” Id. The Supreme Court characterizes the second step of the analysis as “a search for an
‘inventive concept’ — i.e., an element or combination of elements that is ‘sufficient to ensure that the patent in practice amounts to significantly more than a patent upon the [ineligible concept] itself.”’ Id. ...

Like the claim at issue in Ultramercial, “[t]his ordered combination of steps recites an abstraction” as it has no particular concrete or tangible form. Ultramercial, Inc. and Ultramercial LLC v. Hulu , LLC and Wildtangent, Inc., 2014 WL 5904902, 4 (Fed. Cir. 2014). ...

“The second step in the [Alice] analysis requires us to determine whether the claims do significantly more than simply describe that abstract method.” Ultramercial at 5 (citing Mayo at 1297). Our reviewing court instructs us that “[w]e must examine the limitations of the claims to determine whether the claims contain an ‘inventive concept’ to ‘transform’ the claimed abstract idea into patent eligible subject matter. Alice at 2357 (quoting Mayo at 1298). The transformation of an abstract idea into patent eligible subject matter “requires ‘more than simply stat[ing] the [abstract idea] while adding the words ‘apply it.’” Id. (quoting Mayo at 1294). Those “additional features” must be more than “well-understood, routine, conventional activity.” Mayo at 1298.

REEXAMINATION

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2171 DEEP SKY SOFTWARE, INC. Patent Owner and Appellant v. SOUTHWEST AIRLINES CO. Requester and Respondent Ex Parte 6738770 et al 09/823,406 95000625 - (D) BRANCH 102/103 PROCOPIO, CORY, HARGREAVES & SAVITCH LLP Third Party Requester: THOMPSON & KNIGHT, L.L.P. WOOD, WILLIAM H original AL HASHEMI, SANA A

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2624 APPLE INC. Requester v. S3 GRAPHICS CO. LTD. Patent Owner and Appellant Ex Parte 6775417 et al 10/052,613 95000585 - (D) DILLON 103 OBLON, SPIVAK, MCCLELLAND MAIER & NEUSTADT, L.L.P. Third Party Requester: Novak Druce & Quigg TRAN, HENRY N original DO, ANH HONG

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3662 GOOGLE INC. Requester v. INVENTOR HOLDINGS, LLC Patent Owner and Appellant Ex Parte 6199014 et al 08/997,677 95002031 - (D) CURCURI 103 Ascenda Law Group, PC Third Party Requester: Sterne Kessler Goldstein & Fox, PLLC LEE, CHRISTOPHER E original ISSING, GREGORY C