REVERSED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1611 Ex Parte Borlongan et al 10218893 - (D) FRANKLIN 103/obviousness-type double patenting FULBRIGHT & JAWORSKI L.L.P. LOVE, TREVOR M
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1782 Ex Parte Bhatnagar et al 11181041 - (D) HASTINGS 102/103 JANAH & ASSOCIATES, P.C. KASHNIKOW, ERIK
Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3685 Ex Parte Chatani 11480203 - (D) PETRAVICK 103 MPG, LLP and SONY OBEID, MAMON A
AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1617 Ex Parte Eitrich et al 10589084 - (D) FRANKLIN 103 Abel Law Group, LLP BROWE, DAVID
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2162 Ex Parte Chatow et al 11796216 - (D) BENOIT 102/103 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY NGUYEN, PHONG H
Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2422 Ex Parte Anglin et al 12433235 - (D) DANG 103 IBM CORPORATION C/O DARCELL WALKER, ATTORNEY AT LAW HAIEM, SEAN N
2424 Ex Parte Hsiao 12021655 - (D) POTHIER 103 ROGITZ & ASSOCIATES SHELEHEDA, JAMES R
Tech Center 2600 Communications
2637 Ex Parte Josef Moeller 10349837 - (D) KRIVAK 103 WALL & TONG, LLP/ALCATEL-LUCENT USA INC. BELLO, AGUSTIN
2653 Ex Parte Gidron et al 10240409 - (D) EASTHOM 102 WALL & TONG, LLP/ALCATEL-LUCENT USA INC. ELAHEE, MD S
REEXAMINATION
AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1761 Ex parte MARTEK BIOSCIENCES CORPORATION and DSM NUTRITIONAL PRODUCTS, LLC, Patent Owner and Appellant 90009659 5698244 08/483,477 GUEST 112(1) obviousness-type double patenting Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C FOR THIRD-PARTY REQUESTER: Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, PC original SHERIDAN ROSS P.C. HUANG, EVELYN MEI original WEIER, ANTHONY J
(citing CFMT, Inc. v. Yieldup Int’l Corp, 349 F.3d 1333, 1338 (Fed. Cir. 2003) (“Enablement does not require an inventor to meet lofty standards for success in the commercial marketplace.”)).
CFMT, Inc. v. Yieldup Int ’l Corp., 349 F.3d 1333, 68 USPQ2d 1940 (Fed. Cir. 2003) 2164
...
In this regard, we emphasize the second rationale to obviousness-type double patenting, which is “to prevent multiple infringement suits by different assignees asserting essentially the same patented invention.” In re Hubbell, --- F.3d----, 2013 WL 828475,*3 (Fed. Cir. March 7, 2013) (citing In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 943-4 (CCPA 1982)).
Van Ornum, In re, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982) 804, 804.02
FEDERAL CIRCUIT
REVERSED
Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3671; 3501 DOUGLAS DYNAMICS, LLC, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BUYERS PRODUCTS COMPANY, Defendant-Cross Appellant. 2011-1291, 2012-1046, -1057, -1087, -1088 Re. 35,700 5,125,174 07/686,123 5,353,530 07/939,331 6,944,978 09/878,744 RADER Dissenting MAYER summary judgment of noninfringement/denial of a permanent injunction Andrus, Sceales, Starke & Sawal, LLP; Renner, Otto, Boisselle & Sklar, LLP original MICHAEL, BEST & FRIEDRICH; WOOD, HERRON & EVANS, LLP" MCBEE, J; BATSON, VICTOR D
AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2404; 3105 ATELIERS DE LA HAUTE-GARONNE AND F2C2 SYSTEMS SAS, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. BROETJE AUTOMATION USA INC. AND BRÖETJE AUTOMATION GMBH, Defendants-Cross Appellants. 2012-1038,-1077 5,011,339 07/447,501 5,143,216 07/589,685 NEWMAN Dissenting PROST failure to disclose the best mode under 112(1) not abandoned Kaye Scholer, LLP; Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP original HAROLD H. DUTTON, JR. NOT, DEFINED; PATTERSON, MARIE D
The requirement that a best mode violation requires intentional concealment was set forth in In re Gay, 309 F.2d 769, 772 (CCPA 1962) where this court’s predecessor explained, “Manifestly, the sole purpose of [the best mode requirement] is to restrain inventors from applying for patents while at the same time concealing from the public preferred embodiments of their inventions which they have in fact conceived.”
Gay, In re, 309 F.2d 769, 135 USPQ 311 (CCPA 1962) 608.01(h), 2161.01, 2165.01
AFFIRMED
Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2421 IN RE SCOTT P. SCHREER 2012-1564 10/086,089 PER CURIAM 103 MICHAEL F. SARNEY, KATTEN MUCHIN ROSENMAN LLP; NATHAN K. KELLEY, Deputy Solicitor, United States Patent and Trademark Office SALCE, JASON P
No comments :
Post a Comment