exxon chem, teva2, markman, abbott diabetes

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1793 Ex Parte Zoltai et al 13450073 - (D) TIMM 112(1)/102 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 112(2) FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, GARRETT & DUNNER LLP WONG, LESLIE A

The Examiner and this Board have an independent obligation to determine the meaning of an application’s claims, notwithstanding the views asserted by an applicant. The obligation is analogous to that of district and appeals court judges. See, e.g., Exxon Chem. Patents, Inc. v. Lubrizol Corp., 64 F.3d 1553, 1555 (Fed. Cir. 1995) (“the trial judge has an independent obligation to determine the meaning of the claims, notwithstanding the views asserted by the adversary parties.”); see also Teva Pharm. USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., 135 S. Ct. 831, 835 (2015) (quoting Markman v. Westview Instruments, Inc., 517 U.S. 370, (1996) (“‘the construction of a patent, including terms of art within its claim,’ is not for a jury but ‘exclusively’ for ‘the court’ to determine.”); In re Abbott Diabetes Care Inc., 696 F.3d 1142, 1148 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (Although, “[i]n contrast to district court proceedings involving an issued patent, claims under examination before the PTO are given their broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification,” claim construction remains a legal question, reviewed de novo.).

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3651 Ex Parte Pearl et al 12145954 - (D) MAYBERRY 103 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 102 BOYLE FREDRICKSON S.C. KUMAR, RAKESH

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3788 Ex Parte Henke et al 12375556 - (D) CALVE 103/ obviousness-type double patenting MILLEN, WHITE, ZELANO & BRANIGAN, P.C. CHU, KING M

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2486 Ex Parte Murray et al 10555214 - (D) HOMERE 102/103 102/103 Husch Blackwell LLP Husch Blackwell Sanders LLP Welsh & Katz VO, TUNG T

2492 Ex Parte Karnik 12195737 - (D) HUME 102 102/103 MILLER IP GROUP, PLC GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION PAN, PEILIANG

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3617 Ex Parte SMITH et al 12368284 - (D) STAICOVICI 103 103 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 103 GE GPO- Transportation- The Small Patent Law Group LE, MARK T

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1741 Ex Parte YIN et al 13163088 - (D) ANKENBRAND 103 INTERNATIONAL PAPER COMPANY CALANDRA, ANTHONY J

1791 Ex Parte Jendrysik et al 12766998 - (D) ROESEL 103 BANNER & WITCOFF, LTD. GWARTNEY, ELIZABETH A

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2686 Ex Parte Giorgi et al 12059539 - (D) FRAHM 102/103 ZILKA-KOTAB, PC- HIT KLIMOWICZ, WILLIAM JOSEPH

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2891 Ex Parte Gillies et al 11175196 - (D) HANLON 112(2) HOFFMAN WARNICK LLC TORNOW, MARK W

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3711 Ex Parte Lampert et al 11983403 - (D) GUIJT 103 DOCKET CLERK STANCZAK, MATTHEW BRIAN

REEXAMINATION

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3744 TAIWAN MICROLOOPS CORPORATION and HEWLETT PACKARD COMPANY Requester, Cross-Appellant, Respondent v. CONVERGENCE TECHNOLOGIES (USA) Patent Owner, Appellant, Respondent Ex Parte 7422053 et al 11/272,145 95001749 - (D) SONG 103 EDELL, SHAPIRO & FINNAN, LLC THIRD PARTY REQUESTER: PATTERSON THUENTE CHRISTENSEN PEDERSEN, P.A. CLARKE, SARA SACHIE original FLANIGAN, ALLEN J

alton

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1756 Ex Parte FARAG 11307947 - (D) KRATZ 112(1)/102/103 TAREK FARAG PHASGE, ARUN S

It is the Examiner’s burden to establish a prima facie case of noncompliance based on the written description requirement by presenting evidence or reasons establishing why persons skilled in the art would not recognize in the original disclosure a description of the invention defined by the claims. In re Alton, 76 F.3d 1168, 1175 (Fed. Cir. 1996).

Alton, In re, 76 F.3d 1168, 37 USPQ2d 1578 (Fed. Cir. 1996) 2145 , 2163 , 2163.06 , 2164.05

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2142 Ex Parte Care 12347159 - (D) GRIMES 103 Cuenot, Forsythe & Kim, LLC JIANG, HAIMEI

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2816 Ex Parte KAMEYAMA et al 12346667 - (D) PER CURIAM 103 SEMICONDUCTOR COMPONENTS INDUSTRIES, LLC PAYEN, MARVIN

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1791 Ex Parte Tacklind et al 12486514 - (D) ABRAHAM 103 103 Bay Area Technolgy Law Group PC COX, STEPHANIE A

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2486 Ex Parte Murray et al 10555214 - (D) HOMERE 102/103 102/103 Husch Blackwell LLP Husch Blackwell Sanders LLP Welsh & Katz VO, TUNG T

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1655 Ex Parte Hoyt et al 12261328 - (D) FREDMAN 103 ALTICOR INC. LEITH, PATRICIA A

Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1756 Ex Parte Zhang et al 11954046 - (D) COLAIANNI 103 BrooksGroup FRIDAY, STEVEN A

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2169 Ex Parte Yaroslavskiy et al 12269170 - (D) FINK 103 ORACLE c/o MARSH FISCHMANN & BREYFOGLE LLP (Oracle formerly d/b/a Sun Microsystems) UDDIN, MD I

Morris, wright

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1617 Ex Parte Bartholomaus 10596194 - (D) PAULRAJ 112(2)/103 FROMMER LAWRENCE & HAUG JUSTICE, GINA CHIEUN YU

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3731 Ex Parte BIGGS et al 12233359 - (D) FREDMAN 102 102 BGL/Cook - Chicago ALEMAN, SARAH WEBB

Thus, the term “elastic” may be interpreted more broadly than returning to an original shape, and also be interpreted as an adjective that modifies the socket material to incorporate characteristics such as being springy or capable of ready change as in the alternative dictionary definitions. See In re Morris, 127 F.3d 1048, 1054-56 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (“Absent an express definition in their specification, the fact that appellants can point to definitions or usages that conform to their interpretation does not make the PTO’s definition unreasonable when the PTO can point to other sources that support its interpretation.”)

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

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1644 Ex Parte Geraghty et al 12064537 - (D) PAULRAJ 103 MYERS BIGEL SIBLEY & SAJOVEC SCHWADRON, RONALD B

“The mere age of the references is not persuasive of the unobviousness of the combination of their teachings, absent evidence that, notwithstanding knowledge of the references, the art tried and failed to solve the problem.” In re Wright, 569 F.2d 1124, 1127 (CCPA 1977) (100 year old patent was properly relied upon in a rejection based on a combination of references.).

Wright, In re, 569 F.2d 1124, 193 USPQ 332 (CCPA 1977) 707.07(f) , 2125 , 2145

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2191 Ex Parte Berger et al 11825703 - (D) GALLIGAN obviousness-type double patenting/102/103 Jackson Walker LLP VO, TED T

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2461 Ex Parte Ozaki 11687924 - (D) NEW 103 WHITHAM, CURTIS & CHRISTOFFERSON & COOK, P.C. CLAWSON, STEPHEN J

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3746 Ex Parte Liske et al 12532653 - (D) HOFFMANN 103 WARN, HOFFMANN, P.C. BOBISH, CHRISTOPHER S

3777 Ex Parte Fraser et al 12096734 - (D) WIEKER 102/103 PHILIPS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY & STANDARDS TURCHEN, ROCHELLE DEANNA

REHEARING

DENIED
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2166 Ex Parte Raguillat et al 12500110 - (D) HOMERE 103 Cuenot, Forsythe & Kim, LLC LO, ANN J

bond, zletz

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2173 Ex Parte Ragan 11959993 - (D) ADAMS 103 SCHWEGMAN LUNDBERG & WOESSNER/EBAY BASOM, BLAINE T

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2836 Ex Parte Arling et al 12206181 - (D) COLAIANNI 102/103 GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP (CHI) THOMAS, LUCY M

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3654 Ex Parte ARCATI 12256770 - (D) STAICOVICI 102/103 Eckert Seamans Cherin & Mellott, LLC CAMPOS, JR, JUAN J

It is well established that during examination, “claims . . . are to be given their broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification, [ ] and . . . claim language should be read in light of the specification as it would be interpreted by one of ordinary skill in the art.” In re Bond, 910 F.2d 831, 833 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (internal citation and quotations omitted). This means that the words of the claim must be given their plain meaning unless the plain meaning is inconsistent with the Specification. In re Zletz, 893 F.2d 319, 321 (Fed. Cir. 1989).

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

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

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3777 Ex Parte Golijanin et al 11775037 - (D) FREDMAN 103 PATENT TECHNOLOGIES, LLC ROBERT D. GUNDERMAN, JR. GUPTA, VANI

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3763 Ex Parte Guo et al 11910680 - (D) ADAMS 103 103 Kite & Key, LLC ST. JUDE MEDICAL, ATRIAL FIBRILLATION DIVISION EISENBERG, REBECCA E

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1677 Ex Parte Dunne et al 11899599 - (D) FREDMAN 103 CARDINAL LAW GROUP, LTD Caliper Life Sciences, Inc. LAM, ANN Y

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2128 Ex Parte Boskovic et al 12835055 - (D) NEW 103 SCHWEGMAN LUNDBERG & WOESSNER/SAP ALHIJA, SAIF A

REEXAMINATION

AFFIRMED
1502 Ex parte BAYER SCHERING PHARMA AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT Appellant Ex Parte 5676968 et al 08/433,557 90012693 - (D) PAULRAJ 103 MILLEN WHITE ZELANO & BRANIGAN RAILEY, JOHNNY F original BROUILLETTE, D GABRIELLE

baxter travenol, Net MoneyIN, atmel

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1786 Ex Parte Howard 12135254 - (D) ANKENBRAND 103 E I DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY THOMPSON, CAMIE S

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2433 Ex Parte Verma et al 12057950 - (D) FISHMAN 103 Whitham, Curtis, & Christofferson, P.C. ANDERSON, MICHAEL D

2481 Ex Parte Shlissel et al 10498888 - (D) NAPPI 103 Husch Blackwell LLP Husch Blackwell Sanders LLP Welsh & Katz JONES, HEATHER RAE

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1789 Ex Parte Wesson et al 12089764 - (D) PAK 102/103 102/103 CARLSON GASKEY & OLDS GRAY, JILL M

“[E]xtrinsic evidence may be considered [in the anticipation rejection] when it is used to explain, but not expand, the meaning of a reference.” In re Baxter Travenol Labs., 952 F.2d 388, 390 (Fed. Cir. 1991). Nevertheless, “differences between the prior art reference and a claimed invention, however slight, invoke the question of obviousness, not anticipation.” Net MoneyIN, Inc. v. VeriSign, Inc., 545 F.3d 1359, 1371 (Fed. Cir. 2008). To prevail in an appeal to this Board, Appellant must adequately explain or identify reversible error in the Examiner’s § 102 rejections.

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

Net MoneyIN, Inc. v. VeriSign, Inc., 545 F.3d 1359, 88 USPQ2d 1751 (Fed. Cir. 2008) 2152.02(b)

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2443 Ex Parte Renschler et al 12134688 - (D) HORVATH 112(2)/103 112(2)/103 QUALCOMM INCORPORATED JOHN, CLARENCE

“[I]n order for a claim to meet the particularity requirement of ¶ 2, the corresponding structure(s) of a means-plus-function limitation must be disclosed in the written description in such a manner that one skilled in the art will know and understand what structure corresponds to the means limitation.” Atmel Corp. v. Information Storage Device, Inc., 198 F.3d 1374, 1382 (Fed. Cir. 1999) (emphasis added). The proper inquiry “asks first whether structure is described in the specification, and if so, whether one skilled in the art would identify the structure from that description.” Id. at 1381 (emphasis in original).

Atmel Corp. v. Information Storage Devices Inc., 198 F.3d 1374, 53 USPQ2d 1225 (Fed. Cir. 1999) 2181

2447 Ex Parte Archer et al 12060508 - (D) MOHANTY obviousness-type double patenting 103 IBM (ROC-BKLS) c/o Kennedy Lenart Spraggins LLP JOSHI, SURAJ M

2493 Ex Parte Aviles et al 12015197 - (D) MORGAN 103 103 Mahamedi Paradice LLP (NetApp) SHAW, PETER C

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1619 Ex Parte Weber et al 11352600 - (D) FREDMAN 103 L'Oreal USA VENKAT, JYOTHSNA A

Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1715 Ex Parte Hicks et al 11833942 - (D) SMITH 103 Stolowitz Ford Cowger LLP LIGHTFOOT, ELENA TSOY

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2468 Ex Parte Chang et al 11751445 - (D) SILVERMAN 101 103 AT&T Legal Department - HFZ PHUNG, LUAT

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3634 Ex Parte Beachy 12774691 - (D) HOFFMANN 103 BELASCO, JACOBS & TOWNSLEY LLP CHIN-SHUE, ALVIN CONSTANTINE

lemin

custom search

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3646 Ex Parte Otani 12075978 - (D) MOORE 103 102/103 PANASONIC AUTOMOTIVE SYSTEM COMPANY OF AMERICA NGUYEN, CHUONG P

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1722 Ex Parte JEON et al 12557215 - (D) WARREN 103 H.C. PARK & ASSOCIATES, PLC CHU, JOHN S Y

In re Lemin, 332 F.2d 839, 841, 141 USPQ 814 (CCPA 1964) ("Generally speaking there is nothing unobvious in choosing 'some' among  'many' indiscriminanately.")

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2112 Ex Parte Hamzeh 11769585 - (D) BARRETT 103 Alpine Technology Law Group LLC c/o CPA Global RIZK, SAMIR WADIE

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2482 Ex Parte Acharya et al 11145832 - (D) HOMERE 103 RYAN, MASON & LEWIS, LLP HOSSAIN, FARZANA E

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3634 Ex Parte Biecker 11909813 - (D) SMEGAL 103 112(1) 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 112(2) FITCH EVEN TABIN & FLANNERY, LLP JOHNSON, BLAIR M

3682 Ex Parte Strock et al 11488783 - (D) CRAWFORD obviousness-type double patenting/103 HUNTON & WILLIAMS LLP ALVAREZ, RAQUEL

REHEARING

DENIED
Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3753 Ex Parte Griepsma et al 11113536 - (R) HOFFMANN 103 CARELLA, BYRNE, CECCHI, OLSTEIN, BRODY & AGNELLO ROST, ANDREW J

telemac, schering digitech

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1715 Ex Parte Badyal et al 10509295 - (D) PER CURIAM 103 WINSTEAD P.C. LIGHTFOOT, ELENA TSOY

Appellants argue that the Examiner’s reliance upon Levy in an anticipation rejection is improper. Appeal Br. 6. However, under certain circumstances, an anticipation rejection over multiple references has been held to be proper, for example, to show that a characteristic not disclosed in the reference is inherent, as in the instant case. See Telemac Cellular Corp. v. Topp Telecom, Inc., 247 F.3d 1316, 1328, 58 USPQ2d 1545, 1553 (Fed. Cir. 2001)(“[R]ecourse to extrinsic evidence is proper to determine whether a feature, while not explicitly discussed, is necessarily present in a reference.”).1

1 While we cite to Telemac Cellular Corp., we note that the Court in Schering Corp. v. Geneva Pharm., 339 F.3d 1373, 1377 (Fed. Cir. 2003), rejected the contention that inherent anticipation requires recognition in the prior art. Thus, recognition by a person of ordinary skill in the art before the critical date of a patent is not required to show anticipation by inherency.

Schering Corp. v. Geneva Pharm. Inc., 339 F.3d 1373, 67 USPQ2d 1664 (Fed. Cir. 2003) 2112 , 2152.02(b)

1716 Ex Parte Scheible et al 11553982 - (D) ABRAHAM 103 Janah & Associates,P.C. FORD, NATHAN K

1735 Ex Parte Kirkwood et al 11556099 - (D) ABRAHAM 103 KLINTWORTH & ROZENBLAT IP LLC AND THE BOEING COMPANY SAAD, ERIN BARRY

1743 Ex Parte Johnston et al 11427149 - (D) KRATZ 102/103 3M INNOVATIVE PROPERTIES COMPANY OCHYLSKI, RYAN M

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2157 Ex Parte Kim 11586396 - (D) MacDONALD 103 GREER, BURNS & CRAIN, LTD CHANNAVAJJALA, SRIRAMA T

2166 Ex Parte Dickerson et al 11427365 - (D) NAPPI 103 IBM CORP (YA) C/O YEE & ASSOCIATES PC AHLUWALIA, NAVNEET K

2168 Ex Parte Grems et al 11428016 - (D) LEE E. BARRETT 103 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 112(2)/101 STAAS & HALSEY LLP GORTAYO, DANGELINO N

“Data in its ethereal, non-physical form is simply information that does not fall under any of the categories of eligible subject matter under section 101.” Digitech Image Techs., LLC v. Electronics for Imaging, Inc., 758 F.3d 1344, 1350 (Fed. Cir. 2014).

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2453 Ex Parte Monier et al 12848502 - (D) REIMERS 102/103 DORITY & MANNING, P.A. ESKANDARNIA, ARVIN

2459 Ex Parte Rama et al 12249753 - (D) FINK 102 Perkins Coie LLP - NetApp NGUYEN, MINH CHAU

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2857 Ex Parte Creus et al 11375531 - (D) PER CURIAM 102/103 Nokia Corporation and Alston & Bird LLP SCHECHTER, ANDREW M

2898 Ex Parte Kuo et al 13028306 - (D) TIMM 102/103 37 C.F.R. §41.77(b) 112(2) TROP, PRUNER & HU, P.C. MOVVA, AMAR

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3623 Ex Parte Kaiser et al 11646365 - (D) CRAWFORD 101/103 CATERPILLAR/FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, L.L.P. SINGH, GURKANWALJIT

3637 Ex Parte Pipkorn et al 12653541 - (D) WARNER 103 HERBERT E. HAYNES JR. CHEN, JOSE V

3689 Ex Parte Rule et al 11643578 - (D) WORTH 102 SCHWEGMAN LUNDBERG & WOESSNER/EBAY MOONEYHAM, JANICE A

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1731 Ex Parte Erdler et al 12266214 - (D) DELMENDO 102 103 Muncy, Geissler, Olds & Lowe, P.C. OLSEN, KAJ K

1791 Ex Parte Yang et al 12719549 - (D) ANKENBRAND 103 103 CP Kelco US, INC c/o Pete Pappas, Sutherland, Asbill & Brennan LLP BEKKER, KELLY JO

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2467 Ex Parte Justin 11000019 - (D) MacDONALD 103 103 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 112(2) HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY MAIS, MARK A

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2811 Ex Parte Sutardja et al 11964696 - (D) HANLON 102/103 112(2) Lee & Hayes , pllc LI, MEIYA

2894 Ex Parte Lee et al 11569060 - (D) HANLON 103 103 H.C. PARK & ASSOCIATES, PLC LAURENZI, MARK A

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3776 Ex Parte Azar 12334521 - (D) REIMERS 112(2)/103 112(4) Yen Jung Sung DOAN, ROBYN KIEU

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1713 Ex Parte Tanaka et al 12451932 - (D) HOUSEL 103 LOWE HAUPTMAN HAM & BERNER, LLP TRAN, BINH X

1767 Ex Parte Brothers et al 12436273 - (D) SMITH 103 E I DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY BUIE-HATCHER, NICOLE M

1778 Ex Parte Fisher et al 12581459 - (D) WARREN 103 REINHART BOERNER VAN DEUREN P.C. KURTZ, BENJAMIN M

1792 Ex Parte Labrunie et al 11569478 - (D) BEST 103 K&L Gates LLP-Chicago WILLIAMS, LELA

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2111 Ex Parte Lu et al 12784490 - (D) KRIVAK 103 NORTH AMERICA INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CORPORATION STIGLIC, RYAN M

2135 Ex Parte Starr et al 12058228 - (D) HOMERE 103 Spectra Logic Corporation RIGOL, YAIMA

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2427 Ex Parte Riley et al 11781814 - (D) MCMILLIN 103 THE DIRECTV GROUP, INC. BELIVEAU, SCOTT E

2434 Ex Parte Dalzell et al 11835490 - (D) DANG 103 HONEYWELL/S&S LIPMAN, JACOB

2462 Ex Parte Miettinen et al 12318209 - (D) BEAMER 103 Squire Patton Boggs (US) LLP Nokia Technologies Oy CHOUDHRY, SAMINA F

2466 Ex Parte Cavgalar et al 11093768 - (D) HOMERE 103 Volpe and Koenig, P.C. and Wi-LAN Inc. OH, ANDREW CHUNG SUK

2474 Ex Parte Huo 11150634 - (D) DANG 102/103 FLETCHER YODER (LUCENT) CHUNG, HOON J

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2645 Ex Parte Liu 12310357 - (D) BUI 103 HARNESS, DICKEY & PIERCE, P.L.C. NGUYEN, DINH

2646 Ex Parte Tanach 12586703 - (D) KAISER 103 INTEL CORPORATION c/o CPA Global IQBAL, KHAWAR

2657 Ex Parte POI 11694316 - (D) JEFFERY 102 VERIZON ROBERTS, SHAUN A

2659 Ex Parte Emam et al 12026319 - (D) SAADAT 103 IBM CORP (YA) C/O YEE & ASSOCIATES PC GUERRA-ERAZO, EDGAR X

2699 Ex Parte Oliver 11658718 - (D) DANG 103 LANDO & ANASTASI, LLP STERNBANE, LAURENCE J

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2822 Ex Parte Chiang et al 11674137 - (D) HANLON 103 Legal Department NIESZ, JAMIE C

2857 Ex Parte Minai et al 11597221 - (D) FRANKLIN concurring NAGUMO 103 SCULLY SCOTT MURPHY & PRESSER, PC SCHECHTER, ANDREW M

2862 Ex Parte Singh et al 12367893 - (D) WILSON 112(1) IBM CORPORATION (MH) c/o MITCH HARRIS, ATTORNEY AT LAW, L.L.C. NGHIEM, MICHAEL P

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3689 Ex Parte Hack et al 10188310 - (D) FETTING 112(2)/103 FISH & RICHARDSON, P.C. NGUYEN, TAN D

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3776 Ex Parte Lund et al 12135289 - (D) MURPHY 103 THE PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY STEITZ, RACHEL RUNNING

REEXAMINATION

REVERSED
Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2436 PALO ALTO NETWORKS, INC. Third Party Requester and Appellant v. JUNIPER NETWORKS, INC. Patent Owner and Respondent Ex Parte 7,650,634 B2 et al 10/402,920 95002251 - (D) McKEOWN 102/103 37 C.F.R. §41.77(b) 103 Irelll & Manella LLP THIRD-PARTY REQUESTER: Van Pelt, Yi & James LLP HENEGHAN, MATTHEW E original REZA, MOHAMMAD W

REHEARING

DENIED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1743 Ex Parte PACTIV LLC Patent Owner and Appellant Ex Parte 6315921 et al 09/346,752 90011596 - (R) LEBOVITZ SNQ PACTIV CORPORATION C/O NIXON PEABODY LLP THIRD PARTY REQUESTER: HARTER SECREST & EMERY LLP JASTRZAB, KRISANNE MARIE original CROSS, LATOYA I

larson

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1754 Ex Parte Okabe et al 10596653 - (D) SMITH 103 HOWSON & HOWSON LLP BAND, MICHAEL A

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2411 Ex Parte Dropps et al 12502973 - (D) KAISER 102/103 KLEIN, O'NEILL & SINGH, LLP LAI, ANDREW

2444 Ex Parte O’BRIEN et al 12414084 - (D) LENTIVECH 102/103 BROOKS KUSHMAN P.C. /Oracle America/ SUN / STK HUSSAIN, FARRUKH

2452 Ex Parte Kahol et al 11061248 - (D) HUGHES 103 HICKMAN PALERMO TRUONG BECKER BINGHAM WONG LLP GREENE, JOSEPH L

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2834 Ex Parte Isshiki et al 12341627 - (D) KRATZ 103 SUGHRUE MION, PLLC MOK, ALEX W

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3618 Ex Parte Soliman et al 12047392 - (D) WOODS 103 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 112(2) MACMILLAN, SOBANSKI & TODD, LLC - FORD EBNER, KATY MEYER

3649 Ex Parte Merhar et al 12657841 - (D) JESCHKE 103 Davidson, Davidson & Kappel, LLC KENNEDY, JOSHUA T

We do not agree with the Examiner’s position (id.) that In re Larson, 340 F.2d 965 (CCPA 1965), supports the rejection here. In that case, in addition to aspects of the claimed invention, the prior art reference at issue taught “additional framework”—i.e., additional structure not required by the claimed invention—that provided an “additional feature.” Larson, 340 F.2d at 969. The court held that “[i]f this additional feature is not desired, it would seem a matter of obvious choice to eliminate it and the function it serves.” Id. (citation omitted). In Larson, after eliminating the additional structure, the disclosed device still provided certain benefits, just not the specific additional benefit associated with the additional structure. In contrast, here, the evidence of record shows that removal of the material at issue from the embodiment shown in Figure 9 of Andronica would actually undermine the sole stated purpose of that embodiment: “better locking securement.”

Larson, In re, 340 F.2d 965, 144 USPQ 347 (CCPA 1965) 2144.04

3657 Ex Parte Gedenk 11921932 - (D) KINDER 103 WALTER OTTESEN WILLIAMS, THOMAS J

3681 Ex Parte Wilkie 10425471 - (D) JESCHKE 103 GIBB & RILEY, LLC HENRY, RODNEY M

3691 Ex Parte Boylan et al 10201186 - (D) FETTING 103 ERICSSON INC. TINKLER, MURIEL S

3711 Ex Parte Scherba 12765511 - (D) HORNER 103 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 103 FAY SHARPE LLP STANCZAK, MATTHEW BRIAN

3752 Ex Parte Strong 12137369 - (D) ASTORINO 102 FLETCHER YODER (ILLINOIS TOOL WORKS INC.) KIM, CHRISTOPHER S

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1746 Ex Parte Dronzek Jr. 10587126 - (D) BEST 103 103 HEDMAN & COSTIGAN, P.C. GOFF II, JOHN L

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2613 Ex Parte Liu et al 12134279 - (D) SILVERMAN 112(2) 112(1)/112(2)/101 IP AUTHORITY, LLC RAMRAJ SOUNDARARAJAN BRIER, JEFFERY A

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2884 Ex Parte WILL et al 12784757 - (D) COLAIANNI 112(1)/102/103 112(2) BUCHANAN, INGERSOLL & ROONEY PC IGYARTO, CAROLYN

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1712 Ex Parte Williams et al 12283865 - (D) ROESEL 112(2)/103 Mark A. Litman & Associates, P.A. PENNY, TABATHA L

1713 Ex Parte Egli et al 12316156 - (D) HASTINGS 103 Rohm and Haas Electronic Materials LLC CATHEY JR, DAVID A

1741 Ex Parte Hart et al 11761535 - (D) PER CURIAM 112(1)/103 MEADWESTVACO CORPORATION CALANDRA, ANTHONY J

1741 Ex Parte Hart et al 12602780 - (D) PER CURIAM 103 MEADWESTVACO CORPORATION CALANDRA, ANTHONY J

1786 Ex Parte Chandrasekaran et al 11663938 - (D) GARRIS 103 MCDONNELL BOEHNEN HULBERT & BERGHOFF LLP LOPEZ, RICARDO E.

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2136 Ex Parte Carr et al 13099222 - (D) KAISER obviousness-type double patenting/103 ZILKA-KOTAB, PC- IBM DUDEK JR, EDWARD J

2156 Ex Parte Bivens II et al 12181906 - (D) HUME 102 RSW IP Law IBM CORPORATION LU, KUEN S

2157 Ex Parte Liu et al 12061720 - (D) SMITH 103 GIBB & RILEY, LLC MINA, FATIMA P

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2433 Ex Parte Alme 11736981 - (D) MCMILLIN 103 Wong Cabello Lutsch Rutherford & Brucculeri, LLP. C/O CPA Global HOFFMAN, BRANDON S

2433 Ex Parte Bennetts et al 12243126 - (D) BEAMER 102/103 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY ANDERSON, MICHAEL D

2439 Ex Parte Campbell et al 12179910 - (D) TROCK 103 IBM (RPS-BKLS) c/o Kennedy Lenart Spraggins LLP JACKSON, JENISE E

2453 Ex Parte Jun 11387932 - (D) HUTCHINGS 103 SUGHRUE MION, PLLC GEORGANDELLIS, ANDREW C

2456 Ex Parte Jania et al 12469567 - (D) MCMILLIN 103 IBM CORPORATION C/O: VanCott Bagley, Cornwall & McCarthy MA, WING

2461 Ex Parte Pandit et al 12224817 - (D) STRAUSS 102/103 THOMSON Licensing LLC LAMONT, BENJAMIN S

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2625 Ex Parte Levine 10986927 - (D) JURGOVAN 103 Alfred B. Levine HARRIS, DOROTHY H

2652 Ex Parte Keren et al 11359357 - (D) WIEKER 103 Verint Systems, Inc. Meunier Carlin & Curfman, LLC INTAVONG, JIRAPON

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2853 Ex Parte Chandu et al 12231086 - (D) WARREN 102 103 InfoPrint Solutions/ Blakely FIDLER, SHELBY LEE

2875 Ex Parte Visser et al 12341251 - (D) COLAIANNI 103 DINSMORE & SHOHL LLP MAI, ANH T

2883 Ex Parte Page et al 12846929 - (D) MANTIS MERCADER 103 RENNER OTTO BOISSELLE & SKLAR, LLP CHIEM, DINH D

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3623 Ex Parte Maga et al 11292843 - (D) CRAWFORD 103 BGL/Accenture - Chicago BRINKS GILSON & LIONE FEACHER, LORENA R

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3745 Ex Parte Nagler 10928155 - (D) WARNER 103 DR. MARK M. FRIEDMAN VERDIER, CHRISTOPHER M

REEXAMINATION

AFFIRMED-IN-PART 
Tech Center 2600 Communications
2622 VIDSYS, INC., Requester, v. PROXIMEX CORPORATION, Patent Owner. Ex Parte 7777783 et al 11/726,879 95001525 - (D) SIU 103 102/103 THE SMALL PATENT LAW GROUP LLC PRABHAKHER, PRITHAM DAVID

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3728 Ex parte FOODFRESH TECHNOLOGIES, LLC. Patent Owner and Appellant Ex Parte 7,270,238 B2 et al 10/782,536 90013013 - (D) BROWN 103 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 102 MICHAEL BEST & FRIEDRICH LLP (Mke) GRAHAM, MATTHEW C original JOHNSON, JERROLD D