hotchkiss, boehringer, gulack

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3693 Ex Parte Breitenbach 12197734 - (D) FETTING 103 CANTOR FITZGERALD, L.P. AMELUNXEN, BARBARA J

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3742 Ex Parte Hackel 11240676 - (D) BROWNE 103 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory PAIK, SANG YEOP

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1731 Ex Parte Liu 13532838 - (D) NAGUMO 103/double patenting RANKIN, HILL & CLARK LLP PARVINI, PEGAH

The use of similar materials for similar purposes based on properties disclosed as making the materials useful for those purposes is a classical instance of prima facie obviousness. Hotchkiss v. Greenwood, 52 U.S. 248, 265 (1850) (“the knob of clay was simply the substitution of one [known] material for another [wood].”)

1783 Ex Parte Lim et al 11935126 - (D) DERRICK 103 Fox Rothschild LLP WATKINS III, WILLIAM P

1792 Ex Parte Sugawara et al 12065396 - (D) HEANEY 103 SUGHRUE-265550 LONG, LUANA ZHANG

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2168 Ex Parte Schmidt 12060802 - (D) KAISER 103 BOSWELL IP Law GORTAYO, DANGELINO N

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2427 Ex Parte Casagrande 12135360 - (D) BUI 103 INGRASSIA FISHER & LORENZ, P.C. (EchoStar) ALATA, YASSIN

2434 Ex Parte Overcash et al 11458965 - (D) PYONIN 103 HANLEY, FLIGHT & ZIMMERMAN, LLC BAYOU, YONAS A

2466 Ex Parte Witzel et al 12299346 - (D) STEPHENS 103 ERICSSON INC. ROBERTS, BRIAN S

2487 Ex Parte George et al 12771929 - (D) PINKERTON 103 GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY LI, TRACY Y

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3621 Ex Parte Mehta et al 13356269 - (D) MEDLOCK 103 double patenting FISH & RICHARDSON P.C. WU, RUTAO

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3715 Ex Parte Isenberg 13526384 - (D) SMEGAL 103 41.50 112(2) David H. Chervitz THAI, XUAN MARIAN

It is well established that “[a]n intended use or purpose usually will not limit the scope of the claim because such statements usually do no more than define a context in which the invention operates.” Boehringer Ingelheim Vetmedica, Inc. v. Schering-Plough Corp., 320 F.3d 1339, 1345 (Fed. Cir. 2003).

In re Gulack, 703 F.2d 1381, 1385 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (when descriptive material is not functionally related to the substrate, the descriptive material will not distinguish the invention from the prior art in terms of patentability).

Gulack, In re, 703 F.2d 1381, 217 USPQ 401 (Fed. Cir. 1983) 2112.01

REHEARING

DENIED
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2135 Ex Parte Stansell et al 12234850 - (D) SPONDOWSKI 103 CRGO LAW GOSSAGE, GLENN