unigene, GPAC, ruff

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1642 Ex Parte Lorens et al 10696909 - (D) PRATS 103 Klarquist Sparkman, LLP REDDIG, PETER J

Thus, even post-KSR, “[o]bviousness requires more than a mere showing that the prior art includes separate references covering each separate limitation in a claim under examination.” Unigene Laboratories, Inc. v. Apotex, Inc., 655 F.3d 1352, 1360 (Fed. Cir. 2011).

Instead, “[i]n determining whether obviousness is established by combining the teachings of the prior art, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art.” In re GPAC Inc., 57 F.3d 1573, 1581 (Fed. Cir. 1995) (internal quotations omitted).

GPAC, In re, 57 F.3d 1573, 35 USPQ2d 1116 (Fed. Cir. 1995) 716.03, 2145

Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1715 Ex Parte Eickmeyer et al 11812443 - (D) DELMENDO 102/103 BUCHANAN, INGERSOLL & ROONEY PC LEONG, NATHAN T

1716 Ex Parte Mahoney et al 11066520 - (D) PAK 112(2)/103 JOSHUA D. ISENBERG DHINGRA, RAKESH KUMAR

1734 Ex Parte Kim et al 12192024 - (D) HASTINGS 103 KNOBBE MARTENS OLSON & BEAR LLP LEE, REBECCA Y

In order to rely on equivalence as a rationale supporting an obviousness rejection, the equivalency must be recognized in the prior art, and cannot be based on applicant's disclosure or the mere fact that the components at issue are functional or mechanical equivalents. In re Ruff, 256 F.2d 590, 596-96 (CCPA 1958); In re Lam, 35 Fed. Appx. 889, 894-95 (Fed. Cir. 2002)

Ruff, In re, 256 F.2d 590, 118 USPQ 340 (CCPA 1958) 2144.06

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2181 Ex Parte Maitland et al 11588384 - (D) DANG 102/103 FAY SHARPE/LUCENT TAYLOR, BROOKE JAZMOND

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3766 Ex Parte Kjellstrom et al 11045571 - (D) SCHEINER 102/103 Medtronic, Inc. (CRDM) HELLER, TAMMIE K

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1715 Ex Parte Straccia et al 11609501 - (D) GARRIS 103 BROOKS KUSHMAN P.C./FGTL GAMBETTA, KELLY M

1763 Ex Parte Nodelman et al 12002435 - (D) GARRIS 103 BAYER MATERIAL SCIENCE LLC LEONARD, MICHAEL L

1791 Ex Parte Jolly et al 11486423 - (D) SCHAFER 103 FOLEY AND LARDNER LLP BADR, HAMID R

1792 Ex Parte Nietling et al 11255330 - (D) KRATZ 103 WARNER, NORCROSS & JUDD IN RE: ALTICOR INC. CHAWLA, JYOTI

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2164 Ex Parte Blair 11783909 - (D) KUMAR 103 Lawrence Harbin MAHMOOD, REZWANUL

2168 Ex Parte Bruce et al 11263224 - (D) NEW 103 Baker Botts LLP MACKES, KRIS E

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2615 Ex Parte Muth 10517246 - (D) CLEMENTS 103 112(2) 37 CR 41.50(b) 102/103 NXP B.V. NEURAUTER, GEORGE C

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2871 Ex Parte Park et al 11454505 - (D) DIXON 102/103 BRINKS HOFER GILSON & LIONE ARENDT, PAISLEY L

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3731 Ex Parte Tower et al 11432838 - (D) FREDMAN 103 Medtronic, Inc. HUGHES, SAMUEL T

3731 Ex Parte Tower et al 10127969 - (D) FREDMAN 112(1)/103 Medtronic CardioVascular SEVERSON, RYAN J

REEXAMINATION

REVERSED
Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2887 LTS SCALE COMPANY, LLC Requester and Appellant v. ACME SCALE COMPANY INC. Patent Owner 95001401 7,757,946 11/108,271 WEINBERG 102/103 37 C.F.R. § 41.77(b) 102/103 Barnes & Thornburg LLP (CH THIRD  PARTY R EQUESTER:  ECKERT  EAMANS  CHERIN  &  MELLOTT TON, MY TRANG original LE, THIEN MINH

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1753 Guardian Industries Corp. Requester and Appellant v. Asahi Glass Co., Ltd. and AGC Plat Glass Patent Owner and Respondent 90009782 6,193,856 09/011,749 LEBOVITZ 103 FOLEY AND LARDNER LLP Third Party Requester: Nixon & Vanderhye P.C. original OBLON, SPIVAK, MCCLELLAND MAIER & NEUSTADT, L.L.P. DIAMOND, ALAN D original VERSTEEG, STEVEN H