Tuesday December 21, 2010

REVERSED

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1722 Ex Parte Chang 11/324,588 GARRIS 103(a) HAYNES AND BOONE, LLP EXAMINER WALKE, AMANDA C

2400 Networking, Mulitplexing, Cable, and Security
2454 Ex Parte Silva 10/759,409 HAIRSTON Concurring-in-part BAUMEISTER 103(a) CAREY, RODRIGUEZ, GREENBERG & PAUL, LLPSTEVEN M. GREENBERG EXAMINER PARK, JEONG S

2464 Ex Parte Sarraf et al 10/636,161 HOFF 102(e) RYAN, MASON & LEWIS, LLP
EXAMINER NGUYEN, PHUONGC HAU BA

2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2839 Ex Parte Hayes et al 11/612,794 EASTHOM 103(a) Taylor & Aust, PC EXAMINER
PATEL, HARSHAD C

2882 Ex Parte Hult 11/259,088 HANLON 103(a) STERNE, KESSLER, GOLDSTEIN & FOX P.L.L.C. EXAMINER NGUYEN, HUNG

The Court does not look favorably on per se rules of obviousness. See In re Ochiai, 71 F.3d 1565, 1570 (Fed. Cir. 1995 (no per se rule of obviousness exists).

Ochiai, In re, 71 F.3d 1565, 37 USPQ2d 1127 (Fed. Cir. 1995) . . . . . . . . 706.02(n), 2116.01

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3731 Ex Parte Ramzipoor et al 11/140,691 ADAMS 102(b)/103(a) FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, GARRETT & DUNNER LLP EXAMINER MCEVOY, THOMAS M

3775 Ex Parte Suzuki et al 10/659,302 McCARTHY 102(b) GREENBLUM & BERNSTEIN, P.L.C. EXAMINER BARRETT, THOMAS C

AFFIRMED-IN-PART

1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1628 Ex Parte Kulmann 10/380,405 GREEN 112(2)/103(a) MILLEN, WHITE, ZELANO & BRANIGAN, P.C. EXAMINER HUI, SAN MING R

2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2811 Ex Parte Leong et al 11/394,625 MANTIS MERCADER 102(e)/103(a) 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) Kathy Manke Avago Technologies Limited EXAMINER TRAN, TRANG Q

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3625 Ex Parte Chu et al 11/340,647 FETTING 102(e)/103(a) RADER, FISHMAN & GRAUER PLLC EXAMINER ROSEN, NICHOLAS D

An adequate traverse must contain adequate information or argument to create on its face, a reasonable doubt regarding the circumstances justifying Examiner's notice of what is well known to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Boon, 439 F.2d 724, 728 (CCPA 1971). If an applicant does not seasonably traverse the taking of official notice during examination, then the object of the official notice is taken to be admitted prior art. In re Chevenard, 139 F.2d 711, 713 (CCPA 1943).

Chevenard, In re, 139 F.2d 71, 60 USPQ 239 (CCPA 1943) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2144.03

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3738 Ex Parte Rivron et al 10/656,855 LEE 102(b)/103(a) 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) Mark J. Burns Haugen Law Firm EXAMINER PELLEGRINO, BRIAN E

REEXAMINATION

EXAMINER AFFIRMED-IN-PART

3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU)
3724 Ex parte DENNIS P. DEGREGORIO, JR. 90/010,091 6,978,547 LEE 112(1)/112(2)/103(a) BARNES & THORNBURG LLP THIRD PARTY REQUESTER MAYER BROWN LLP EXAMINER FOSTER, JIMMY G original EXAMINER WATTS, DOUGLAS D

Breadth in scope does not equal indefiniteness. In re Miller, 441 F.2d 689, 693 (CCPA 1971).

Miller, In re, 441 F.2d 689, 169 USPQ 597 (CCPA 1971) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2173.04

EXAMINER AFFIRMED

3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU)
2742 Ex parte RONALD A. KATZ TECHNOLOGY LICENSING L.P. Appellant 90/008,095
5,684,863 BOALICK 102(b)/103(a) FOR PATENT OWNER: REENA KUYPER, ESQ. BYARD NILSSON, ESQ. FOR THIRD PARTY REQUESTER: JOHN L. WELSH WELSH & FLAXMAN LLC EXAMINER KIELIN, ERIK J original EXAMINER BROWN, THOMAS

AFFIRMED

Ex Parte Dobransky et al
Ex Parte Fedynyshyn et al
Ex Parte Foth et al
Ex Parte Hall et al
Ex Parte Larson et al
Ex Parte Lu et al
Ex Parte Lupp et al
Ex Parte Lyles et al
Ex Parte Okada et al
Ex Parte Skidmore et al
Ex Parte Chan
Ex Parte Young et al

REHEARING

Ex Parte Elbers et al
Ex Parte Lencki et al