REVERSED

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
Ex Parte Bullock et al WARREN 102(e) HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY

Ex Parte Cunningham et al TIMM 103(a) CAROL WILSON BP AMERICA INC

In general, a limitation is inherent if it is the “natural result flowing from” the explicit disclosure of the prior art. Schering Corp. v. Geneva Pharms., 339 F.3d 1373, 1379, 67 USPQ2d 1664 (Fed.Cir. 2003).

MPEP: 2112

Ex Parte Ferencz et al WARREN 102(b)/103(a) PPG INDUSTRIES, INC.

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
Ex Parte Ottesen et al MACDONALD 101/103(a) IBM CORPORATION

2400 Networking, Mulitplexing, Cable, and Security
Ex Parte Howard COURTENAY 102(b)/103(a) MHKKG/SUN


2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
Ex Parte Gravelle BAUMEISTER 103(a) CAESAR, RIVISE, BERNSTEIN, COHEN & POKOTILOW, LTD.

Any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based on
hindsight reasoning, but so long as it takes into account only knowledge which
was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was
made and does not include knowledge gleaned only from applicant’s disclosure,
such a reconstruction is proper.

In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 1395, , 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971).

MPEP: 707.07(f), 2145

Ex Parte Wetzel et al HAIRSTON 102(b)/103(a) BEUSSE WOLTER SANKS MORA & MAIRE, P. A.

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
Ex Parte Shibasaki WILLIAM F. PATE III 112(1)/112(2)/103(a) TROXELL K. SNYDER OTIS ELEVATOR COMPANY

First of all, we do not believe that “substantially” renders the claimed subject matter indefinite in this case. “Substantially” is often used to mean largely but not wholly what is specified. See, e.g., York Products, Inc., v. Central Tractor Farm & Family Center, 99 F.3d 1568, 1572-73, 40 USPQ2d 1619 (Fed. Cir. 1996); See also, Amhil Enterprises Ltd. v. Wawa, Inc., 81 F.3d 1554, 1562, (Fed. Cir. 1996).

MPEP: 2181

Ex Parte Imai HORNER 103(a) KANESAKA BERNER AND PARTNERS LLP

Ex Parte Koelzer WILLIAM F. PATE III 103(a) ST. ONGE STEWARD JOHNSTON & REENS, LLC

Ex Parte Schmitz et al CRAWFORD 103(a) BRINKS HOFER GILSON & LIONE

Ex Parte Oddsen et al PATE, III 102(b) DESIGN IP, P.C.

Ex Parte Beigel et al WILLIAM F. PATE III 103(a) INTERNATIONAL TRUCK INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY COMPANY

We are in agreement with Appellants’ argument that the incorporation of the rain water trough in the mounting bar as disclosed by Appellants does reflect a certain synergy that is indicative of nonobviousness. See Anderson’s-Black Rock, Inc. v. Pavement Salvage Co., 396 U.S. 57, 60-62, 163 USPQ 673 (1969).

MPEP: 716.01(a), 2141, 2143.01

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Designs
Ex Parte Larsen BAHR 103(a) DIEDERIKS & WHITELAW, PLC

“[A] claim preamble has the import that the claim as a whole suggests for it.” Bell Commuc’ns Research, Inc. v. Vitalink Commuc’ns Corp., 55 F.3d 615, 620, 34 USPQ2d 1816 (Fed. Cir. 1995). “[I]f the claim preamble is ‘necessary to give life, meaning, and vitality’ to the claim, then the claim preamble shouldbe construed as if in the balance of the claim.” Pitney Bowes, Inc. v. Hewlett-Packard Co., 182 F.3d 1298, 1305, 51 USPQ2d 1161 (Fed. Cir. 1999); see also Kropa v. Robie, 187 F.2d 150, 152, 88 USPQ 478 (CCPA 1951) (A preamble reciting “‘An abrasive article’” was deemed essential to point out the invention defined by claims to an article comprising abrasive grains and a hardened binder and the process of making it. The court stated “it is only by that phrase that it can be known that the subject matter defined by the claims is comprised as an abrasive article. Every union of substances capable inter alia of use as abrasive grains and a binder is not an ‘abrasive article.’” Therefore, the preamble served to further define the structure of the article produced.).

MPEP: 707.07(f), 2111.02

AFFIRMED-IN-PART

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
Ex Parte Nguyen DANG 102(b) 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) ROY A. EKSTRAND

2600 Communications
Ex Parte Busch et al HAIRSTON 103(a) PHILIPS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY & STANDARDS

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Designs
Ex Parte Liu et al HORNER 102(e)/103(a) SHELL OIL COMPANY