REVERSED

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
Ex Parte Heinrich et al HASTINGS 103(a) KENNAMETAL INC.

Ex Parte Christian et al PAK 112(1)/112(2)/103(a) obviousness-type double patenting OBLON, SPIVAK, MCCLELLAND MAIER & NEUSTADT, L.L.P.

The key question in any obviousness double patenting analysis is: “Does any claim in the application define merely an obvious variation of an invention claimed in the patent asserted as supporting double patenting?” General Foods Corp. v. Studiengesellschaft Kohle mbH, 972 F.2d 1272, 1278 (Fed. Cir. 1992) (discussing In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438 (CCPA 1970)). As stated by our reviewing court in In re Braat, 937 F.2d 589, 592 (Fed. Cir. 1991) (citation omitted):

Obviousness-type double patenting is a judicially created doctrine intended to
prevent improper timewise extension of the patent right by prohibiting the
issuance of claims in a second patent which are not “patentably distinct” from
the claims of a first patent.

An analysis analogous to an obviousness analysis under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) comes into play during the step of determining the obviousness of the “difference” between the claimed invention and the patented invention. See Studiengesellschaft Kohle mbH v. N. Petrochemical Co. , 784 F.2d 351, 355 (Fed. Cir. 1986); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 892-93 (Fed. Cir. 1985). The Examiner may use the patent’s Specification as a dictionary to determine the meaning of terms in the patent’s claim. In re Vogel, 422 F.2d at 441. However, the Examiner cannot use the patent’s Specification as though it were prior art. General Foods Corp. v. Studiengesellschaft Kohle mbH, 972 F.2d at 1281.

General Foods Corp. v. Studiengesellschaft Kohle mbH, 972 F.2d 1272, 23 USPQ2d 1839 (Fed. Cir. 1992) . . . . . . . . . . .804

Vogel, In re, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970) . . . 804, 804.01, 804.02, 1504.06

Braat, In re, 937 F.2d 589, 19 USPQ2d1289 (Fed. Cir. 1991) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .804

Studiengesellschaft Kohle mbH v. Northern Petrochemical Co. , 784 F.2d 351, 228 USPQ 837 (Fed. Cir. 1986) . . . . . . 804.01

Longi, In re, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .804

2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
Ex Parte Jalkanen et al HAIRSTON 102(b)/103(a) ALSTON & BIRD LLP

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
Ex Parte Beaven et al LORIN 103(a)/101 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) GORDON E NELSON

Ex Parte Monk FETTING 103(a) TOWNSEND AND TOWNSEND AND CREW, LLP

Ex Parte Peterson et al KERINS 102(b) PERKINS COIE, LLP

Ex Parte Ryderstam et al SILVERBERG 103(a)/102(e) 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) PRICE, HENEVELD, COOPER, DEWITT & LITTON, LLP FGTL

Ex Parte Ukigawa et al LORIN 103(a) SUGHRUE MION, PLLC

AFFIRMED-IN-PART

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
Ex Parte Adelman HUGHES 103(a) Fellers, Snider, Blankenship, Bailey & Tippens, P.C.