REVERSED

1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
Ex Parte Ballevre et al GREEN 103(a) K&L GATES LLP

Moreover, the Examiner must consider all of the claim limitations in setting forth a rejection over the prior art. See, e.g., In re Geerdes, 491 F.2d 1260, 1262-63 (CCPA 1974) (in considering grounds of rejection, “every limitation in the claim must be given effect rather than considering one in isolation from the others.”).

Ex Parte Markman et al SCHEINER 103(a) MODERN TIMES LEGAL

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
Ex Parte Choi et al OWENS 103(a) CHRISTIE, PARKER & HALE, LLP

Ex Parte Jiang HASTINGS 112(1) DICKINSON WRIGHT PLLC

It is well established that the content of the drawings may also be considered in determining compliance with the written description requirement. See, e.g., In re Kaslow, 707 F. 2d 1366, 1375 (Fed. Cir. 1983).

Kaslow, In re, 707 F.2d 1366, 217 USPQ 1089 (Fed. Cir. 1983) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 706.03(v), 2141.02, 2161.01, 2163.02

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
Ex Parte Kushnick HOMERE 103(a) CREDENCE C/O MURABITO HAO BARNES, LLP

2400 Networking, Mulitplexing, Cable, and Security
Ex Parte Brown et al NAPPI 102(a) FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.

2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
Ex Parte Uchida et al KRIVAK 102(b)/102(e)/103(a) 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) GREER, BURNS & CRAIN

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
Ex Parte Chapman et al SILVERBERG 102(b)/103(a) JASON D. KELLY SHUMAKER & SIEFFERT, P.A.

Ex Parte Dalton WALSH 102(b)/102(e)/103(a) CAROTHERS AND CAROTHERS

Ex Parte Denison PATE III 102(b)/103(a) FULWIDER PATTON LLP

Ex Parte Grady et al KERINS 103(a) BACHMAN & LAPOINTE, P.C. (P & W)

The established precedent of our reviewing court sets up a two-fold test for determining whether art is analogous: “First, we decide if the reference is within the field of the inventor’s endeavor. If it is not, we proceed to determine whether the reference is reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the inventor was involved.” In re Deminski, 796 F.2d 436, 442 (Fed. Cir. 1986).

Deminski, In re, 796 F.2d 436, 230 USPQ 313 (Fed. Cir. 1986) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2141.01(a)

Ex Parte Williams et al SILVERBERG 112(1)/102(b)/102(e) MEDICINELODGE INC.

AFFIRMED-IN-PART

1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
Ex Parte Kiefer et al GRIMES 112(1)/102(e) SHERIDAN ROSS PC

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
Ex Parte Drunert OWENS 103(a) HARNESS, DICKEY & PIERCE, P.L.C.

Ex Parte Finkelshtain et al OWENS 112(1)/102(e)/103(a) DR. MARK M. FRIEDMAN

2600 Communications
Ex Parte Goodwin et al MANTIS MERCADER 112(1)/102(b)/103(a) BAKER BOTTS L.L.P.

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
Ex Parte Hansen et al PATE III 102(b)/103(a) BARNES & THORNBURG