REVERSED

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1711 Ex Parte Waleh et al 10/786,280 COLAIANNI 103(a) DAVID W. COLLINS EXAMINER MARKOFF, ALEXANDER

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3655 Ex Parte Pardee 11/150,670 KERINS 103(a)/obviousness-type double patenting DYKEMA GOSSETT PLLC EXAMINER BONCK, RODNEY H

AFFIRMED-IN-PART

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1726 Ex Parte Yan et al 10/763,633 HANLON WARREN concurring-in-part and dissenting-in-part 112(2)/112(1)/103(a) MILLER IP GROUP, PLC GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION EXAMINER WALKER, KEITH D

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3777 Ex Parte Rongen et al 10/215,713 ADAMS 102(b) 103(a) 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) PHILIPS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY & STANDARDS EXAMINER ROY, BAISAKHI

AFFIRMED

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1774 Ex Parte Lomas et al 10/996,725 PAK 103(a) HONEYWELL/UOP EXAMINER YOUNG, NATASHA E

1785 Ex Parte Schitter 10/990,749 COLAIANNI 103(a) RANKIN, HILL & CLARK LLP EXAMINER SHEWAREGED, BETELHEM

“The inherent teaching of a prior art reference, a question of fact, arises both in the context of anticipation and obviousness.” In re Napier, 55 F.3d 610, 613 (Fed. Cir. 1995) (affirmed 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection based in part on inherent disclosure in one of the references).

Napier, In re, 55 F.3d 610, 34 USPQ2d 1782 (Fed. Cir. 1995) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2112

2600 Communications
2626 Ex Parte Cowsar et al 11/006,157 HOFF 103(a) ALCATEL-LUCENT USA INC. EXAMINER HARPER, V PAUL