mouttet, CLS, mayo

custom search

REVERSED
1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1777 Ex Parte Kando et al 11681353 - (D) HOUSEL 103 BURR & BROWN ZALASKY, KATHERINE M

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2157 Ex Parte Khaliq et al 10953112 - (D) ELLURU 102/103 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 103 HARRITY & HARRITY, LLP CHEUNG, HUBERT G

2167 Ex Parte Cannon et al 11091790 - (D) BARRY 103 ADVANTEDGE LAW GROUP, LLC BADAWI, SHERIEF

2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2422 Ex Parte Maclnnis 11270999 - (D) HOFF 102/103 TKHR (Broadcom) YENKE, BRIAN P

2432 Ex Parte Jordan et al 10279346 - (D) WINSOR 112(2)/102/103 AT&T Legal Department - PIP Law LLC LANIER, BENJAMIN E

2600 Communications
2611 Ex Parte Lindoff et al 10830387 - (D) HUGHES 103 POTOMAC PATENT GROUP PLLC FOTAKIS, ARISTOCRATIS

2612 Ex Parte Gleitman 11072795 - (D) KRIVAK 103 Baker Botts L.L.P. WONG, ALBERT KANG

2617 Ex Parte Rigge 10672656 - (D) MacDONALD 103 RYAN, MASON & LEWIS, LLP DOAN, KIET M

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3721 Ex Parte Britz et al 11708087 - (D) JUNG 103 ABELMAN, FRAYNE & SCHWAB LOPEZ, MICHELLE

3733 Ex Parte Trieu et al 11413785 - (D) JENKS concurring and dissenting FREDMAN 102/103 Medtronic, Inc. (Spinal) PHILOGENE, PEDRO

3734 Ex Parte Tsugita 10621972 - (D) JENKS 112(1)/103 SEAGER, TUFTE & WICKHEM, LLC BLATT, ERIC D

3761 Ex Parte Popp et al 11305182 - (D) KERINS 103 KIMBERLY-CLARK WORLDWIDE, INC. STEPHENS, JACQUELINE F

3767 Ex Parte Bierman et al 11295903 - (D) MARTIN 103 KNOBBE MARTENS OLSON & BEAR LLP SCHMIDT, EMILY LOUISE

3769 Ex Parte Lee et al 10167681 - (D) SPAHN 112(1)/112(2)/103 WISCONSIN ALUMNI RESEARCH FOUNDATION C/O BOYLE FREDRICKSON S.C SHAY, DAVID M

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2472 Ex Parte Babiarz et al 10799704 - (D) BAUMEISTER 103 103 HUNTON & WILLIAMS LLP JAIN, RAJ K

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3653 Ex Parte Norrid 09963716 - (D) CRAWFORD 103 103 IBM CORPORATION (RHF) C/O ROBERT H. FRANTZ KARMIS, STEFANOS

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3753 Ex Parte Cripps et al 11419642 - (D) CALVE 103 103 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 103 RENNER, OTTO, BOISSELLE & SKLAR, LLP FRISTOE JR, JOHN K

These arguments are largely speculative and not persuasive because a determination of obviousness does not require an actual, physical substitution of elements or a showing that the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of a primary reference or physically combined with another reference. In re Mouttet, 2012 WL 2384056, at *5 (Fed. Cir. Jun. 26, 2012) (citations omitted).

3761 Ex Parte Collins et al 11444847 - (D) SCHEINER 102/103 102/103 KIMBERLY-CLARK WORLDWIDE, INC. KIDWELL, MICHELE M

AFFIRMED
1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1724 Ex Parte Lu 11272448 - (D) KIMLIN 103 NIXON & VANDERHYE, PC MCDONALD, RODNEY GLENN

1731 Ex Parte Zuyev et al 11557805 - (D) PRAISS 112(2)/102 MOMENTIVE PERFORMANCE MATERIALS INC.-Quartz c/o DILWORTH & BARRESE, LLP WIESE, NOAH S

1734 Ex Parte Hoppe et al 10581778 - (D) KATZ Concurring GARRIS 103 KENYON & KENYON LLP LEE, REBECCA Y

1746 Ex Parte Rohde et al 10520536 - (D) FRANKLIN 103 DILWORTH IP, LLC GOFF II, JOHN L

1764 Ex Parte Moszner et al 11585280 - (D) PRAISS 103 Ivoclar Vivadent Inc. REDDY, KARUNA P

1771 Ex Parte Boffa 11435698 - (D) OBERMANN 103/double patenting M. CARMEN & ASSOCIATES, PLLC VASISTH, VISHAL V

1774 Ex Parte Stevens et al 10006876 - (D) ROBERTSON 103 CHEVRON U.S.A. INC. DUONG, THANH P

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2117 Ex Parte Aipperspach et al 11845829 - (D) MOORE 112(1)/102 IBM CORPORATION (ROC) KERVEROS, DEMETRIOS C

2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2447 Ex Parte Ieperen 09966733 - (D) STEPHENS 102/103 KATTEN MUCHIN ROSENMAN LLP NEURAUTER, GEORGE C

2600 Communications
2617 Ex Parte Gage 10763289 - (D) WINSOR 102/103 QUALCOMM INCORPORATED HUYNH, NAM TRUNG

2626 Ex Parte Burns et al 09863996 - (D) DANG 102/103 KATTEN MUCHIN ROSENMAN LLP VO, HUYEN X

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3611 Ex Parte Garfinkle et al 10147669 - (D) HORNER 112(2)/103 Bay Area Technolgy Law Group PC DAVIS, CASSANDRA HOPE

3645 Ex Parte Herwanger et al 11180956 - (D) SPAHN 103 WesternGeco L.L.C. ALSOMIRI, ISAM A

3676 Ex Parte Rickman et al 11482601 - (D) HORNER 103 ROBERT A. KENT DITRANI, ANGELA M

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3733 Ex Parte Stad et al 11861551 - (D) BONILLA 112(1)/103 NUTTER MCCLENNEN & FISH LLP SCHNEIDER, LYNNSY M

3739 Ex Parte Francischelli et al 10752135 - (D) SAINDON 103 Medtronic CardioVascular PEFFLEY, MICHAEL F
 
REHEARING
 
DENIED
1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1777 Ex Parte WIMBERGER-FRIEDL et al 11576279 - (R) GAUDETTE 102/103 PHILIPS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY & STANDARDS GERIDO, DWAN A

GRANTED
2600 Communications
2625 Ex Parte Braun 10670902 - (D) BARRY Concurring COURTENAY 103 37 C.F.R. §41.50(b) 112(2) Basch & Nickerson LLP DHINGRA, PAWANDEEP

And because human color perception is a subjective mental process (abstract idea), the “single most reasonable understanding is that [Appellant’s] claim is directed to nothing more than a fundamental truth or disembodied concept,” i.e., subjective human color perception. See CLS Bank Int’l v Alice Corp. Pty, LTD, No. 2011-1301, 2012 WL 2708400, at *10 (Fed. Cir. July 9, 2012). In light of the evolving state of §101 case law, the Examiner should review all claims for patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. §101, consistent with current USPTO guidance regarding recent court decisions, including Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc., 132 S. Ct. 1289 (2012).

DENIED
1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1781 Ex Parte Keller et al 10498863 - (R) GARRIS 103 ROTHWELL, FIGG, ERNST & MANBECK, P.C. DICUS, TAMRA

vaidyanathan

custom search

REVERSED
1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1714 Ex Parte Abd Elhamid et al 11463614 - (D) SMITH 103 MILLER IP GROUP, PLC GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION COLEMAN, RYAN L

1729 Ex Parte Hong et al 10743866 - (D) COLAIANNI 103 KNOBBE MARTENS OLSON & BEAR LLP EGGERDING, ALIX ECHELMEYER

1741 Ex Parte Vehmas 10864878 - (D) GAUDETTE 103 Ladas & Parry LAZORCIK, JASON L

“In making an obviousness rejection, the examiner should not rely on conclusory statements that a particular feature of the invention would have been obvious or was well known. Instead, the examiner should elaborate, discussing the evidence or reasoning that leads the examiner to such a conclusion.” In re Vaidyanathan, 381 Fed. Appx. 985, 994 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (non-precedential)

2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2486 Ex Parte Saxena et al 11014301 - (D) WHITEHEAD, JR. 103 Buckley, Maschoff & Talwalkar LLC/ Intel Corporation HALLENBECK-HUBER, JEREMIAH CHARLES

2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2885 Ex Parte Lea 10491504 - (D) RUGGIERO 103 3M INNOVATIVE PROPERTIES COMPANY SAWHNEY, HARGOBIND S

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3737 Ex Parte Ein-Gal 11281591 - (D) McCOLLUM 103 DEKEL PATENT LTD., DAVID KLEIN MEHTA, PARIKHA SOLANKI

3761 Ex Parte Collins et al 11799356 - (D) SCHEINER 112(1)/102 KIMBERLY-CLARK WORLDWIDE, INC. MARCETICH, ADAM M

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2128 Ex Parte Wu et al 11307357 - (D) CHEN 112(2) 102/103 Jerome R. Drouillard PATEL, SHAMBHAVI K

2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2427 Ex Parte Morris 11022151 - (D) RUGGIERO 112(2)/102 101/102/103 SCENERA RESEARCH, LLC ALATA, YASSIN

2600 Communications
2629 Ex Parte Pallakoff 10891544 - (D) STEPHENS 112(1)/103 112(1)/112(2)/103 Nathan Calvert NGUYEN, JIMMY H

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3671 Ex Parte Mettler et al 11280780 - (D) ABRAMS 103 103 RENNER OTTO BOISSELLE & SKLAR, LLP ADDIE, RAYMOND W

AFFIRMED
1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1724 Ex Parte RAMOTOWSKI 11828412 - (D) SMITH obviousness-type double patenting 103 NAVAL UNDERSEA WARFARE CENTER LEONG, SUSAN DANG

1745 Ex Parte Ng et al 11027285 - (D) OBERMANN 103 DORITY & MANNING, P.A. MCCLELLAND, KIMBERLY KEIL

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2168 Ex Parte Pang et al 11306852 - (D) HUGHES 102/103 Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C. KOO, GARY J

2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2427 Ex Parte Hartselle et al 11022740 - (D) CHEN 103/obviousness-type double patenting AT&T Legal Department - SZ TELAN, MICHAEL R

2427 Ex Parte Meek et al 11023268 - (D) CHEN 103/obviousness-type double patenting AT&T Legal Department - SZ TELAN, MICHAEL R

2600 Communications
2611 Ex Parte Carlson 09882100 - (D) DILLON 103 STERNE, KESSLER, GOLDSTEIN & FOX P.L.L.C. BOCURE, TESFALDET

2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2853 Ex Parte Chan 10990634 - (D) GONSALVES 103 FAY SHARPE LLP AL HASHIMI, SARAH

2854 Ex Parte Grimm et al 11281350 - (D) ROBERTSON 102/103 LERNER GREENBERG STEMER LLP HINZE, LEO T

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3635 Ex parte The Procter & Gamble Company, Patent Owner and Appellant 90011177 - (D) 7,222,732 10/610,952 GUEST 103 THE PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY GELLNER, JEFFREY L original CHAPMAN, JEANETTE E
 
REHEARING
 
DENIED
1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1733 Ex Parte Mukherji et al 11611173 - (D) SMITH 103 CARLSON, GASKEY & OLDS, P.C. KIECHLE, CAITLIN ANNE

skvorecz, techradium, merck2, lamberti, epstein

custom search

REVERSED
1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1716 Ex Parte Iimuro 11390471 - (D) PER CURIAM 103 Tokyo Electron U.S. Holdings, Inc. KACKAR, RAM N

1723 Ex Parte Ransquin et al 10510183 - (D) METZ 103 SUGHRUE MION, PLLC MOWLA, GOLAM

1773 Ex Parte Betancourt et al 10324386 - (D) SMITH 112(1)/112(2)/102/103 BECKMAN COULTER, INC. LUDLOW, JAN M

See eg In re SKVORECZ 580 F.3d 1262, 1268-1269 (2009) (Lacking explicit antecedent basis does not render a claim indefinite if one of ordinary skill in the art would understand the claim when viewed in the context of the Specification.) 

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2158 Ex Parte Lee 11284591 - (D) ZECHER 103 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 112(2) Ben Gill-Ho Lee PENG, HUAWEN A

2168 Ex Parte Javalkar 11669655 - (D) CALDWELL 103 Yudell Isidore Ng Russell PLLC GORTAYO, DANGELINO N

2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2424 Ex Parte Waight et al 09811702 - (D) DANG 103 MOTOROLA MOBILITY LLC SHANG, ANNAN Q

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3721 Ex Parte Clusserath 11050484 - (D) McCARTHY 103 NILS H. LJUNGMAN & ASSOCIATES PARADISO, JOHN ROGER

3732 Ex Parte Lui et al 10593701 - (D) BAHR 103 Law Offices of Albert Wai-Kit Chan MAI, HAO D

3745 Ex Parte Alexander et al 11150864 - (D) SPAHN 103 MacMillan, Sobanski & Todd, LLC KERSHTEYN, IGOR

3761 Ex Parte Khan et al 10812380 - (D) McCARTHY 103 Nazir A Khan MD DEAK, LESLIE R

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1771 Ex Parte Ewert et al 10800471 - (D) COLAIANNI 103 103 CHEVRON PHILLIPS CHEMICAL COMPANY MCAVOY, ELLEN M

1782 Ex Parte Blythe et al 11528830 - (D) COLAIANNI 103 103 PACTIV CORPORATION c/o NIXON PEABODY LLP SMITH, CHAIM A

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2177 Ex Parte Conti et al 10174258 - (D) POTHIER 103 103 VEDDER PRICE P.C. FABER, DAVID

Notably, Wikipedia disclaims the validity of the website’s content and is unreliable. See Techradium, Inc. v. Blackboard Connect, Inc., 2009 WL 1152985, *4 n.5 (E.D. Tex. 2009).

2191 Ex Parte Asare et al 10725728 - (D) CALDWELL 103 103 CAREY, RODRIGUEZ, GREENBERG & O'KEEFE, LLP BROPHY, MATTHEW J

2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2427 Ex Parte Shintani et al 10811036 - (D) DROESCH 102 102/103 RADER FISHMAN & GRAUER PLLC LONSBERRY, HUNTER B

AFFIRMED
1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1724 Ex Parte Hafezi et al 11373635 - (D) SMITH 103 PATTERSON & SHERIDAN, LLP - - APPM/TX VAN, LUAN V

This argument is also unavailing because the fact that a specific embodiment is taught to be preferred is not controlling in an obviousness determination, since all disclosures of the prior art must be considered. Merck & Co., Inc. v. Biocraft Labs. Inc., 874 F.2d 804, 807 (Fed. Cir. 1989) (quoting In re Lamberti, 545 F.2d 747, 750 (CCPA 1976)).

Merck & Co. v. Biocraft Laboratories, 874 F.2d 804, 10 USPQ2d 1843 (Fed. Cir. 1989).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 716.02(a), 2123, 2144.05, 2144.08

Lamberti, In re, 545 F.2d 747, 192 USPQ 278 (CCPA 1976) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2144.01

1728 Ex Parte Fukunaga et al 11206851 - (D) COLAIANNI 103 TAIYO CORPORATION MERSHON, JAYNE L

1765 Ex Parte Gevaert et al 11051992 - (D) KATZ 103 DORITY & MANNING, P.A. SERGENT, RABON A

1774 Ex Parte Ogrizek et al 11990537 - (D) BEST 102 BSH HOME APPLIANCES CORPORATION COOLEY, CHARLES E

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2141 Ex Parte Clauson 10444630 - (D) MacDONALD 102 TROP, PRUNER & HU, P.C. AUGUSTINE, NICHOLAS

Non-prior art publications can be used as evidence of sale before the critical date. Cf. In re Epstein, 32 F.3d 1559 (Fed. Cir. 1994) (Abstracts which were not themselves prior art publications were properly relied as providing evidence that the software products referenced therein were “first installed” or “released” more than one year prior to applicant’s filing date.)

Epstein, In re, 32 F.3d 1559, 31 USPQ2d 1817 (Fed. Cir. 1994) . . . 716.07, 2128, 2133.03(b)

2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2424 Ex Parte Zimmerman et al 09967867 - (D) DANG 103 PHILIPS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY & STANDARDS SHEPARD, JUSTIN E

2442 Ex Parte Hesmer et al 10213858 - (D) BLANKENSHIP 102 MARCIA L. DOUBET LAW FIRM NGUYEN, MINH CHAU

2469 Ex Parte Grosbach et al 10675677 - (D) KRIVAK 102/103 IBM CORPORATION MOORE, IAN N

2600 Communications
2613 Ex Parte Dinu et al 11210973 - (D) DANG 102/103 MENDELSOHN, DRUCKER, & ASSOCIATES, P.C. DOBSON, DANIEL G

2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2833 Ex Parte Finke et al 11175018 - (D) WEINBERG 103 SCHWEGMAN, LUNDBERG & WOESSNER, P.A. GILMAN, ALEXANDER

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3636 Ex Parte Yetukuri et al 11538942 - (D) ASTORINO 103 BROOKS KUSHMAN P.C. / LEAR CORPORATION MCPARTLIN, SARAH BURNHAM

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3734 Ex Parte Anderl et al 11240443 - (D) FRANKLIN 103 FISH & RICHARDSON P.C. (BO) BLATT, ERIC D

3761 Ex Parte Chakravarty et al 10952014 - (D) FRANKLIN 103 ARMSTRONG TEASDALE LLP CHAPMAN, GINGER T

best, fitzgerald, best, multiform

custom search

REVERSED
1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1713 Ex Parte Leigraf et al 10587617 - (D) SMITH 103 TAYLOR IP, P.C. TRAN, BINH X

1715 Ex Parte Sompalli et al 11374651 - (D) SMITH 103 BrooksGroup TALBOT, BRIAN K

1763 Ex Parte Ganapathiappan 11796457 - (D) SMITH 103/obviousness-type double patenting HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY LACLAIR LYNX, DARCY DANIELLE

1778 Ex Parte Wnuk 10587302 - (D) SMITH 103 ROYLANCE, ABRAMS, BERDO & GOODMAN, L.L.P. ANDERSON, DENISE R

1782 Ex Parte Durrant et al 10520608 - (D) SMITH 102/103 RENNER OTTO BOISSELLE & SKLAR, LLP PATTERSON, MARC A

2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2447 Ex Parte Southam 10617002 - (D) WINSOR 103 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 103 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY JEAN GILLES, JUDE

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3731 Ex Parte Weaver et al 10361063 - (D) FREDMAN 103 SEAGER, TUFTE & WICKHEM, LLC HOUSTON, ELIZABETH

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3765 Ex Parte Carter et al 11254547 - (D) JUNG 102 102/103 BANNER & WITCOFF, LTD. HOEY, ALISSA L

“[T]he PTO can require an applicant to prove that the prior art products do not necessarily or inherently possess the characteristics of his [or her] claimed product . . . . Whether the rejection is based on ‘inherency’ under 35 U.S.C. § 102, on ‘prima facie obviousness’ under 35 U.S.C. § 103, jointly or alternatively, the burden of proof is the same,” In re Fitzgerald, 619 F.2d 67, 70 (CCPA 1980) (quoting In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255 (CCPA 1977)).

Fitzgerald, In re, 619 F.2d 67, 205 USPQ 594 (CCPA 1980) . . . . . . . . 706.02(m), 2112, 2183

Best, In re, 562 F.2d 1252, 195 USPQ 430 (CCPA 1977) . . . . . . . . 2112, 2112.01, 2112.02

3768 Ex Parte Willis 10319285 - (D) KAUFFMAN 102 102 Vista IP Law Group LLP CATTUNGAL, SANJAY

AFFIRMED
1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1714 Ex Parte Linares et al 10976537 - (D) SMITH 103/obviousness-type double patenting SCHWEGMAN, LUNDBERG & WOESSNER, P.A. KUNEMUND, ROBERT M

1715 Ex Parte Lubomirsky et al 11192993 - (D) GARRIS 103 PATTERSON & SHERIDAN, LLP - - APPM/TX BAREFORD, KATHERINE A

1715 Ex Parte Patel et al 10531070 - (D) SMITH 103 MARSHALL, GERSTEIN & BORUN LLP LIN, JAMES

1777 Ex Parte Beaudet et al 10563047 - (D) SMITH 103 GIFFORD, KRASS, SPRINKLE,ANDERSON & CITKOWSKI, P.C XU, XIAOYUN

2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2437 Ex Parte Elbe et al 10461913 - (D) KOHUT 103 DICKSTEIN SHAPIRO LLP WILLIAMS, JEFFERY L

2444 Ex Parte Ahn 10781865 - (D) POTHIER 103 ROYLANCE, ABRAMS, BERDO & GOODMAN, L.L.P. GUPTA, MUKTESH G

2600 Communications
2621 Ex Parte Lin et al 10099710 - (D) KOHUT 102/103 JOSEPH S. TRIPOLI THOMSON MULTIMEDIA LICENSING INC. FLETCHER, JAMES A

2626 Ex Parte Guruparan 11184470 - (D) COURTENAY 103 COATS & BENNETT/SONY ERICSSON SERROU, ABDELALI
 
Any special meaning assigned to a term “must be sufficiently clear in the specification that any departure from common usage would be so understood by a person of experience in the field of the invention.” Multiform Desiccants, Inc. v. Medzam Ltd., 133 F.3d 1473, 1477 (Fed. Cir. 1998).
 
Multiform Desiccants Inc. v. Medzam Ltd., 133 F.3d 1473, 45 USPQ2d 1429 (Fed. Cir. 1998).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2106, 2111.01
 
REHEARING
 
DENIED
2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2818 Inter Partes RAMBUS, INC. Patent Owner v. SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS, CO., LTD. and MICRON TECHNOLOGY INC. Requesters 95001154 - (D) 6,584,037 10/102,237 EASTHOM FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, GARRETT & DUNNER LLP ESCALANTE, OVIDIO original NGUYEN, TAN

spada, king, ludtke, fresenius, schering

custom search

REVERSED
1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1654 Ex Parte Carpenter et al 10271832 - (D) GRIMES 112(1)/102 Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc. c/o Marsh Fischmann & Breyfogle LLP GUPTA, ANISH

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1723 Ex Parte Luo et al 10996218 - (D) PER CURIAM 103 GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY MENDEZ, ZULMARIAM

1726 Ex Parte Fukumoto et al 11520571 - (D) HOUSEL 103 MCDERMOTT WILL & EMERY LLP RHEE, JANE J

1782 Ex Parte Wang et al 10241278 - (D) BEST 102/103 VIDAS, ARRETT & STEINKRAUS, P.A. PATTERSON, MARC A

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3623 Ex Parte Doerfler et al 11213168 - (D) KIM 103 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 103 SAP/BSTZ BLAKELY SOKOLOFF TAYLOR & ZAFMAN JACKSON, ERNEST ADEYEMI

3635 Ex Parte Near et al 11731066 - (D) SAINDON 103 JOHNS MANVILLE KATCHEVES, BASIL S

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3731 Ex Parte Clague et al 10694037 - (D) KAUFFMAN 103 Medtronic CardioVascular NGUYEN, TUAN VAN

3734 Ex Parte Valencia 11526326 - (D) SCHEINER 103 VIDAS, ARRETT & STEINKRAUS, P.A. BACHMAN, LINDSEY MICHELE

3739 Ex Parte Scott et al 11238698 - (D) MILLS 112(2)/102/103 PATENT DEPT - INTUITIVE SURGICAL OPERATIONS GOOD, SAMANTHA M

3763 Ex Parte Kusleika 10825309 - (D) FRANKLIN 103 KENYON & KENYON LLP VU, QUYNH-NHU HOANG

3773 Ex Parte Vogel et al 11363426 - (D) SAINDON 102/103 Klaus J. Bach MASHACK, MARK F

“[W]hen the PTO shows sound basis for believing that the products of the applicant and the prior art are the same, the applicant has the burden of showing that they are not.” In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 708 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (citing In re King, 801 F.2d 1324, 1327 (Fed. Cir. 1986) and In re Ludtke, 441 F.2d 660, 664 (CCPA 1971)). In this case, however, the Examiner has not shown a sound basis to shift the burden to Appellants.

Spada, In re, 911 F.2d 705, 15 USPQ2d 1655 (Fed. Cir. 1990) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2112.01

King, In re, 801 F.2d 1324, 231 USPQ 136 (Fed. Cir.1986) . . . . . . .1206, 2112.02, 2131.01

Ludtke, In re, 441 F.2d 660, 169 USPQ 563 (CCPA 1971) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2112.01

3778 Ex Parte Calvert 11277571 - (D) ADAMS 102/103 Shumaker, Loop & Kendrick, LLP HAND, MELANIE JO

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1711 Ex Parte Czyzewski et al 11044396 - (D) OWENS 103 103 BSH HOME APPLIANCES CORPORATION RIGGLEMAN, JASON PAUL

1727 Ex Parte Vyas et al 11201767 - (D) PAK 103 103/obviousness-type double patenting MILLER IP GROUP, PLC GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION ENIN-OKUT, EDU E

2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2448 Ex Parte Schoenfeld 10693423 - (D) GONSALVES 103 103 Fogarty, L.L.C. VU, VIET DUY

AFFIRMED
1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1631 Ex Parte Ishikawa et al 10925905 - (D) GREEN 103 THE INVENTION SCIENCE FUND CLARENCE T. TEGREENE SKIBINSKY, ANNA

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1724 Ex Parte Prohaska et al 11169936 - (D) OWENS 103 ST. ONGE STEWARD JOHNSTON & REENS, LLC OLSEN, KAJ K

1774 Ex Parte Martin et al 10006875 - (D) ROBERTSON 102/103 CHEVRON U.S.A. INC. DUONG, THANH P

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2179 Ex Parte Poerner et al 10666227 - (D) McNAMARA 103 Siemens Corporation LO, WEILUN

2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2427 Ex Parte Young 10621227 - (D) McNAMARA 103 SCHWEGMAN, LUNDBERG & WOESSNER, P.A. INGVOLDSTAD, BENNETT

2457 Ex Parte Orhomuru 09862789 - (D) DIXON 102/103 WILLIAMSON INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW, LLC JACOBS, LASHONDA T

We first note that Appellant employs the Markush group format in claim 5 by reciting “selecting an operation from the group consisting of accessing data . . . , posting data . . . , updating data . . . , deleting data . . . , and combinations thereof.” See MPEP § 2173.05(h)(I). Accordingly, Xu discloses the “selecting” step if Xu discloses selecting one of the recited operations in the group. See Fresenius USA, Inc. v. Baxter Int’l, Inc., 582 F.3d 1288, 1298 (2009) (“[T]he entire element is disclosed by the prior art if one alternative in the Markush group is in the prior art.”) (citing Schering Corp. v. Geneva Pharms., Inc., 339 F.3d 1373, 1380 (Fed. Cir. 2003)).

Schering Corp. v. Geneva Pharm. Inc., 339 F.3d 1373, 67 USPQ2d 1664 (Fed. Cir. 2003). . . . . .2112

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3677 Ex Parte HASHIGUCHI et al 09166233 - (D) MORRISON 103 BACON & THOMAS, PLLC MILLER, WILLIAM L

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3731 Ex Parte Wilson et al 11606620 - (D) FRANKLIN 103 Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC LAWRENCE LIVERMORE NATIONAL LABORATORY EASTWOOD, DAVID C

3737 Ex Parte Tarakci et al 11189437 - (D) ADAMS 112(2)/103 CARR & FERRELL LLP HUNTLEY, DANIEL CARROLL

3778 Ex Parte Song et al 10902998 - (D) FRANKLIN 103 THE PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY HAND, MELANIE JO
 
REHEARING
 
DENIED
1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1613 Ex Parte Davenport et al 10121325 - (D) WALSH 103 THE PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY FUBARA, BLESSING M

dembiczak, gartside, mouttet, etter

custom search

REVERSED
1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1637 Ex Parte Zheng et al 10667191 - (D) LEBOVITZ 102/103 SIEMENS CORPORATION CHUNDURU, SURYAPRABHA

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2174 Ex Parte Blair et al 11170676 - (D) FRAHM Dissenting KOHUT 103 SHERIDAN ROSS P.C. PHAM, LINH K

2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2453 Ex Parte Emerson et al 11594633 - (D) MacDONALD 102/103/obviousness-type double patenting HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY NGUYEN, THU HA T

2463 Ex Parte Bois et al 10366932 - (D) EVANS 103 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY MARCELO, MELVIN C

2478 Ex Parte Jai et al 10600995 - (D) GONSALVES 102/103 Ryan, Mason & Lewis, LLP BRUCKART, BENJAMIN R

2600 Communications
2617 Ex Parte van Rooyen et al 11010983 - (D) HAHN 103 STERNE, KESSLER, GOLDSTEIN & FOX P.L.L.C. AFSHAR, KAMRAN

2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2828 Ex Parte Ito et al 11038123 - (D) COURTENAY 103 Morrison & Foerster LLP GOLUB-MILLER, MARCIA A

The presence or absence of a reason "to combine references in an obviousness determination is a pure question of fact." In re Gartside, 203 F.3d 1305, 1316 (Fed. Cir. 2000) (citing In re Dembiczak, 175 F.3d 994, 1000 (Fed. Cir. 1999)).

Gartside, In re, 203 F.3d 1305, 53 USPQ2d 1769 (Fed. Cir. 2000) . .1216.01, 2144.03

Although the teaching, suggestion, or motivation (TSM) test is no longer a rigid rule post KSR, "the best defense against the subtle but powerful attraction of a hindsight-based obviousness analysis is rigorous application of the requirement for a showing of the teaching or motivation to combine prior art references." Dembiczak, 175 F.3d at 999.

Dembiczak, In re, 175 F.3d 994, 50 USPQ2d 1614 (Fed. Cir. 1999) . . . . . . . . .1504.06, 2144.04

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3653 Ex Parte Zeller 11854230 - (D) STAICOVICI 103 Zeman-Mullen & Ford, LLP RODRIGUEZ, JOSEPH C

3682 Ex Parte Choi et al 10508616 - (D) TURNER 103 LOWE HAUPTMAN HAM & BERNER, LLP HOAR, COLLEEN A

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3724 Ex Parte Patton et al 09957011 - (D) HORNER 102
EASTMAN KODAK COMPANY FRIDIE JR, WILLMON
3735 Ex Parte Widenhouse et al 11798497 - (D) WALSH 103 WELSH FLAXMAN & GITLER LLC DORNA, CARRIE R

3738 Ex Parte Biss et al 11025223 - (D) MILLS 103 MAGINOT, MOORE & BECK, LLP WILLSE, DAVID H

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3676 Ex Parte Marya et al 11769230 - (D) SPAHN 102/103 102/103 SCHLUMBERGER RESERVOIR COMPLETIONS BOMAR, THOMAS S

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3721 Ex Parte Surti 11448494 - (D) BAHR 102/103 102/103 BRINKS HOFER GILSON & LIONE/CHICAGO/COOK CHUKWURAH, NATHANIEL C

3731 Ex Parte Wasicek 10616785 - (D) WALSH 103 103 SEAGER, TUFTE & WICKHEM, LLC NGUYEN, VI X

3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU)
2819 CME GROUP, INC., Requester, Appellant v. REALTIME DATA LLC. Patent Owner, Respondent 95001517 - (D) 7,714,747 11/651,365 SIU 102/103 37 C.F.R. § 41.77(b) 102/103 STERNE, KESSLER, GOLDSTEIN & FOX P.L.L.C. HUGHES, DEANDRA M original NGUYEN, LINH V

AFFIRMED
1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1611 Ex Parte Spisinski et al 11011268 - (D) PER CURIAM 112(2)/103 PITNEY BOWES INC. PURDY, KYLE A

1644 Ex Parte Allen 11436652 - (D) PRATS 112(1)/103 SMITH MOORE LEATHERWOOD LLP DAHLE, CHUN WU

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2113 Ex Parte Flocken et al 11184253 - (D) RUGGIERO 102 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY MCCARTHY, CHRISTOPHER S

2166 Ex Parte Li et al 10643628 - (D) THOMAS 103 HICKMAN PALERMO TRUONG BECKER BINGHAM WONG/ORACLE SAEED, USMAAN

2173 Ex Parte Dolimier et al 10264031 - (D) ARBES 103 PHILIPS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY & STANDARDS BASOM, BLAINE T

2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2426 Ex Parte Gaul et al 09924111 - (D) DILLON 102/103 MERCHANT & GOULD SCIENTIFIC ATLANTA, A CISCO COMPANY HSIUNGFEI, PENG

2600 Communications
2617 Ex Parte Howell et al 09968746 - (D) JEFFERY 103 COCHRAN FREUND & YOUNG LLC EDOUARD, PATRICK NESTOR

We see no error in this position, for “[i]t is well-established that a determination of obviousness based on teachings from multiple references does not require an actual, physical substitution of elements.” In re Mouttet, --- F.3d ---, 2012 WL 2384056, at *5 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (citing In re Etter, 756 F.2d 852, 859 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (en banc) (noting that the criterion for obviousness is not whether the references can be physically combined, but whether the claimed invention is rendered obvious by the teachings of the prior art as a whole)).

Etter, In re, 756 F.2d 852, 225 USPQ 1 (Fed. Cir. 1985) . . . . . . . . . 2242, 2258, 2279, 2286, 2642, 2686.04

2617 Ex Parte Carrion-Rodrigo 10875584 - (D) BISK 103 MINTZ, LEVIN, COHN, FERRIS, GLOVSKY AND POPEO, P.C BRANDT, CHRISTOPHER M

2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2836 Ex Parte Belson et al 11193266 - (D) HAHN 103 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY KAPLAN, HAL IRA

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3662 Ex Parte Adam et al 10335045 - (D) TURNER 102/103 APPLE INC./BSTZ BLAKELY SOKOLOFF TAYLOR & ZAFMAN LLP BADII, BEHRANG

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3727 Ex Parte Boone 11047407 - (D) BAHR 103 ZARLEY LAW FIRM P.L.C. SHAKERI, HADI

3732 Ex Parte Ha et al 10787804 - (D) SCHEINER 102/103 THE PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY LEWIS, RALPH A

3737 Ex Parte Hogan et al 11588043 - (D) FREDMAN 112(1) 103 GE HEALTHCARE c/o FLETCHER YODER, PC  SANTOS, JOSEPH M

3738 Ex Parte Lenz 11289085 - (D) ASTORINO 112(1)/112(2) 102/103 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 102 VIDAS, ARRETT & STEINKRAUS, P.A. GHERBI, SUZETTE JAIME J

3762 Ex Parte Kollatschny 11338375 - (D) MILLS 103 CYBERONICS, INC. LAVERT, NICOLE F

3778 Ex Parte Edgett et al 12122880 - (D) ADAMS 103 MICHAUD-Kinney Group LLP CRAIG, PAULA L
 
3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU)
1636 Ex parte The Trustees of Columbia University 90/006,953 6,455,275 10870229 - (D) LEBOVITZ obviousness-type double patenting COOPER & DUNHAM, LLP QIAN, CELINE X

REHEARING

DENIED
2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2168 Ex Parte Sanders et al 10776069 - (R) DANG 103 Sue Z. Shaper MORRISON, JAY A

2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2832 Ex Parte Van Os et al 11692650 - (R) HOMERE 102 Murphy, Bilak & Homiller, PLLC WARREN, DAVID S

boesch, sebek, eli lilly, berg

custom search

REVERSED
1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1626 Ex Parte Palle et al 11555951 - (D) ADAMS 103 DR. REDDY''S LABORATORIES, INC. COUGHLIN, MATTHEW P

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1715 Ex Parte Zanzig et al 11820684 - (D) KRATZ 103 THE GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY LIGHTFOOT, ELENA TSOY

In this regard, while it is generally a matter of obviousness for the skilled artisan to determine the optimum value within a disclosed range, In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 276 (CCPA 1980), it may not have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to find an optimum value that is significantly outside the range taught by the prior art. See In re Sebek, 465 F.2d 904, 907 (CCPA 1972).

Boesch, In re, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980) . . . . . . . . . . . 716.02(b), 2144.05

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2186 Ex Parte Lau et al 11172226 - (D) COURTENAY 103 BLAKELY SOKOLOFF TAYLOR & ZAFMAN DUDEK JR, EDWARD J

2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2438 Ex Parte Vanttinen et al 09864017 - (D) DIXON 103 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 112(2) Harrington & Smith, Attorneys At Law, LLC TRUONG, THANHNGA B

2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2885 Ex Parte Nall et al 11323637 - (D) ZECHER 103 FAY SHARPE LLP/GE LIGHTING SOLUTIONS, LLC SAWHNEY, HARGOBIND S

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3643 Ex Parte van Zuilekom 11336513 - (D) MILLS 102/103 Brinks Hofer Gilson & Lione/Ann Arbor Parsley, David

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3763 Ex Parte Zhou et al 10346697 - (D) McCOLLUM 102/103 SEAGER, TUFTE & WICKHEM, LLC Flick, Jason

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3672 Ex Parte Du et al 11850243 - (D) REIMERS 102/103 102 SCHLUMBERGER RESERVOIR COMPLETIONS HUTCHINS, CATHLEEN R

AFFIRMED
1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1619 Ex Parte Carty et al 11775002 - (D) GRIMES 103/obviousness-type double patenting Elan Drug Delivery, Inc. c/o Foley & Lardner KASSA, TIGABU

1633 Ex Parte Dzau et al 10850994 - (D) ADAMS obviousness-type double patenting J. MICHAEL SCHIFF Marvich, Maria

See Eli Lilly & Co. v. Barr Labs., Inc., 251 F.3d 955, 969 n.7 (Fed. Cir. 2001) (“The two-way test is only appropriate in the unusual circumstance where, inter alia, the United States Patent and Trademark Office ("PTO") is 'solely responsible for the delay in causing the second-filed application to issue prior to the first.'”) (quoting In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 1437 (Fed. Cir. 1998), emphasis added by the Eli Lilly court).

Berg, In re, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .804

Eli Lilly & Co. v. Barr Laboratories, Inc., 251 F.3d 955, 58 USPQ2d 1869 (Fed. Cir. 2001) . . . . .804, 2144.08, 2165, 2165.01

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1741 Ex Parte Tompkins et al 11726561 - (D) OBERMANN 103 THE PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY HUG, JOHN ERIC

1785 Ex Parte Lu 12168920 - (D) GAUDETTE 112(2)/102 LEONG C. LEI RUTHKOSKY, MARK

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2177 Ex Parte Levine 10041081 - (D) WEINBERG 112(1)/112(2)/103 Perman & Green, LLP PAULA, CESAR B

2600 Communications
2612 Ex Parte Mackenzie et al 11559977 - (D) KRIVAK 103 LOWENSTEIN SANDLER PC SWARTHOUT, BRENT

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3762 Ex Parte Mongeon et al 10663570 - (D) GREEN 103 SHUMAKER & SIEFFERT, P. A. D ABREU, MICHAEL JOSEPH