brummer, orthokinetics

REVERSED

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1725 Ex Parte Pierpont et al 10/295,518 KRATZ 102(b)/102(a)/103(a) 3M INNOVATIVE PROPERTIES COMPANY EXAMINER CREPEAU, JONATHAN

1746 Ex Parte Girshovich et al 11/197,114 HASTINGS 103(a) Browdy and Neimark, PLLC EXAMINER GOFF II, JOHN L

2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2815 Ex Parte Dornbusch et al 10/691,212 SAADAT 112(2)/102(b)/103(a) LARSON NEWMAN, LLP EXAMINER CHU, CHRIS C

Finally, we observe that the Examiner’s reliance (see Ans. 20-26) on the decision in Ex parte Brummer, 12 USPQ2d 1653 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1989), is misplaced. The Board found in Brummer that because the evidence of record showed no known standard for sizing a bicycle to a rider, one of ordinary skill in the art would not have known what size rider a particular bicycle was “designed for” and whether a particular bicycle was covered by that claim. Id. at 1655. However, determining the definiteness of a claim depends on the facts involved. In the present appeal, the facts are closer to what was at issue in Orthokinetics, Inc. v. Safety Travel Chairs, Inc., 806 F.2d 1565 (Fed. Cir. 1986), where the front leg portion of a wheelchair was so dimensioned as to be insertable between the doorframe of an automobile and the seat thereof. Id. at 1575. Appellants’ claim 1 recites the separation between the first and the second terminal pairs to be such that an input-to-output isolation attenuation therebetween is “not less than a first stopband attenuation of the first external filter.” As such, when the external filter is selected, its first stopband attenuation would also be known. Therefore, it does not render the claim indefinite, but merely gives the scope of the claim some breadth.

Brummer, Ex parte, 12 USPQ2d 1653 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1989) . . . . . . . . . 2173.05(b)

Orthokinetics, Inc. v. Safety Travel Chairs, Inc., 806 F.2d 1565, 1 USPQ2d 1081 (Fed. Cir. 1986) . . . . . . . 2173.02, 2173.05(b)

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3644 Ex Parte Yamashita 11/040,182 SAINDON 103(a) BOZICEVIC, FIELD & FRANCIS LLP EXAMINER WILLIAMS, MONICA L

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3736 Ex Parte Swenson et al 10/786,725 ADAMS 103(a) David W. Highet, VP & Chief IP Counsel Becton, Dickinson and Company EXAMINER TOWA, RENE T

3739 Ex Parte Long 10/986,602 WALSH 103(a) WELSH FLAXMAN & GITLER LLC EXAMINER PEFFLEY, MICHAEL F

3785 Ex Parte Zaffetti et al 11/281,137 BROWN 103(a) CARLSON, GASKEY & OLDS, P.C. EXAMINER LEO, LEONARD R
AFFIRMED

1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1613 Ex Parte Smith 10/544,154 ADAMS 103(a)/obviousness-type double patenting HISCOCK & BARCLAY, LLP EXAMINER BASQUILL, SEAN M

1623 Ex Parte Hilfinger 10/972,729 GRIMES 103(a) GIFFORD, KRASS, SPRINKLE, ANDERSON & CITKOWSKI, P.C EXAMINER PESELEV, ELLI

1627 Ex Parte Bakker et al 11/079,089 GREEN 103(a) FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, GARRETT & DUNNER LLP EXAMINER MCMILLIAN, KARA RENITA

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1712 Ex Parte Dahlmann et al 11/535,335 GARRIS 103(a) Leydig, Voit & Mayer, Ltd. (Frankfurt office) EXAMINER WALDBAUM, SAMUEL A

1727 Ex Parte Kejha et al 10/516,986 PER CURIAM 103(a) Zachary T Wobensmith III EXAMINER BEST, ZACHARY P

2400 Networking, Mulitplexing, Cable, and Security
2451 Ex Parte Even et al 10/362,382 FRAHM 103(a) WONG, CABELLO, LUTSCH, RUTHERFORD & BRUCCULERI, L.L.P. EXAMINER DAFTUAR, SAKET K

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3628 Ex Parte Jhingan 10/687,896 FETTING 103(a) SCULLY SCOTT MURPHY & PRESSER, PC EXAMINER CLARK, DAVID J

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3737 Ex Parte Osborn et al 11/295,280 SCHEINER 103(a) THE PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY EXAMINER COOK, CHRISTOPHER L

3761 Ex Parte Datta et al 10/837,251 SAINDON 102(b)/103(a) DORITY & MANNING, P.A. EXAMINER SU, SUSAN SHAN