REVERSED
1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
Ex Parte Ross et al MILLS Concurring McCOLLUM 103(a) INSKEEP INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY GROUP, INC
If when combined, the references "would produce a seemingly inoperative device," then they teach away from their combination. In re Sponnoble, 405 F.2d 578, 587 (CCPA 1969); see also, In re Gordon, 733 F.2d 900, 902 (Fed. Cir. 1984) (finding no suggestion to modify a prior art device where the modification would render the device inoperable for its intended purpose).
Sponnoble, In re, 405 F.2d 578, 160 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1969) . . . . . . . . . . . 2141.02
Gordon, In re, 733 F.2d 900, 221 USPQ 1125 (Fed. Cir. 1984) . . . . . . . . . .2143.01, 2144.08
A proposed modification or combination of the prior art that would change the basic principles under which the prior art invention was designed to operate weighs against a conclusion of prima facie obviousness. In re Ratti, 270 F.2d 810, 813 (CCPA 1959).
Ratti, In re, 270 F.2d 810, 123 USPQ 349 (CCPA 1959). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2143.01
2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
Ex Parte Ribarich MARTIN 103(a) FARJAMI & FARJAMI LLP
AFFIRMED-IN-PART
2400 Networking, Mulitplexing, Cable, and Security
Ex Parte Daoud et al BARRETT 102(e)/103(a) HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY
SEARCH
PTAB.US: Decisions of PTAB Patent Trial and Appeal Board
No comments :
Post a Comment