CCS, flo healthcare, greenberg, lighting world, MIT2

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1773 Ex Parte Greenstein et al 11133943 - (D) HASTINGS 103 Caliper Life Sciences, Inc. C/O CARDINAL LAW GROUP, LTD GORDON, BRIAN R

1791 Ex Parte Yu et al 11279722 - (D) BEST 103 Hovey Williams LLP PADEN, CAROLYN A

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2444 Ex Parte SMITH 12579383 - (D) BENOIT 102 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 112(2) Reed Smith LLP CLOUD, JOIYA M

When an inventor has not signaled an intent to invoke § 112, sixth paragraph, by using the term “means,” the presumption against its invocation is strong but can be overcome if “the claim term fails to recite sufficiently definite structure or else recites function without reciting sufficient structure for performing that function.” Lighting World, Inc. v. Birchwood Lighting, Inc., 382 F.3d 1354, 1358 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (quoting CCS Fitness, Inc. v. Brunswick Corp., 288 F.3d 1359, 1369 (Fed. Cir. 2002) (internal quotation marks omitted) (citation omitted)). A claim limitation that “essentially is devoid of anything that can be construed as structure” can overcome the presumption. Flo Healthcare, 697 F.3d at 1374. The presumption may be overcome by a claim limitation that uses a nonstructural term that is “simply a nonce word or a verbal construct that is not recognized as the name of structure” but is merely a substitute for the term “means for” associated with functional language. Lighting World, 382 F.3d at 1360. Claim language that further defines a term that otherwise would be a nonce word can denote sufficient structure to avoid construction under § 112, sixth paragraph, MIT v. Abacus Software, 462 F.3d 1344, 1354 (Fed. Cir. 2006), as can a claim limitation that contains a term that “is used in common parlance or by persons of skill in the pertinent art to designate structure,” Lighting World, 382 F.3d at 1359. Nor will claim language invoke a § 112, sixth paragraph, construction if persons of ordinary skill in the art reading the specification understand the term to be the name for a structure that performs the function, even when the term covers a broad class of structures or identifies the structures by their function. Greenberg v. Ethicon Endo-Surgery, Inc., 91 F.3d 1580, 1583 (Fed. Cir. 1996) (“Many devices take their names from the functions they perform.”).

Greenberg v. Ethicon Endo-Surgery, Inc., 91 F.3d 1580, 39 USPQ2d 1783 (Fed. Cir. 1996) 2181

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3767 Ex Parte Andersen et al 12320348 - (D) ADAMS 103 LAW OFFICE OF LOUIS WOO BOSWORTH, KAMI A

3771 Ex Parte Daly et al 10864869 - (D) GRIMES 103/obviousness-type double patenting NIXON & VANDERHYE, PC YU, JUSTINE ROMANG

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1619 Ex Parte Weber et al 11352643 - (D) BRADEN 102/103 L'Oreal USA VENKAT, JYOTHSNA A

Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1787 Ex Parte Husemann et al 11917295 - (D) FRANKLIN 103 Norris McLaughlin & Marcus, PA SHAH, SAMIR

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2156 Ex Parte Stading et al 11226960 - (D) DIXON 112(2)/102 IBM CORPORATION NGUYEN, LOAN T

2175 Ex Parte Burckart et al 10733658 - (D) FRAHM 103 CAREY, RODRIGUEZ, GREENBERG & O'KEEFE, LLP LONG, ANDREA NATAE

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3767 Ex Parte Whittaker et al 12030590 - (D) GREEN 102/103 JOHNSON & JOHNSON MEHTA, BHISMA

3775 Ex Parte Jackson 11110405 - (D) GREEN 103 LAW OFFICE OF JOHN C. MCMAHON YANG, ANDREW

3775 Ex Parte Jackson 11187417 - (D) GREEN 103 LAW OFFICE OF JOHN C. MCMAHON YANG, ANDREW

Tech Center  4100 Patent Training Academy
4100 Ex Parte TOOMEY et al 11421178 - (D) GRIMES 103 MCKEE, VOORHEES & SEASE, P.L.C. WELCH, GARY L