custom search
REVERSED
Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3647 Ex Parte Baron 12917886 - (D) SCHOPPER 103 VanOphem IP Law PLC EVANS, EBONY E
3665 Ex Parte Rao et al 11278043 - (D) REIMERS 103 ANGELA M, BRUNETTI, PLLC KING, RODNEY P
AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2422 Ex Parte Hsiao 13687375 - (D) KHAN 112(1)/103 103 ROGITZ & ASSOCIATES LEE, MICHAEL
Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3626 Ex Parte Brown 11528737 - (D) MEDLOCK 112(2) 102 Robert Bosch LLC PAULS, JOHN A
Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3741 Ex Parte Stroud et al 12777508 - (D) CALVE 103 103 TRASKBRITT, P.C./ ORBITAL ATK, INC. GOYAL, ARUN
AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1617 Ex Parte Molenda et al 13062017 - (D) MAJORS 103 NORRIS MCLAUGHLIN & MARCUS, PA ALLEY, GENEVIEVE S
1619 Ex Parte Halter et al 13130939 - (D) JENKS 102 PHILIPS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY & STANDARDS THAKOR, DEV ANG K
1656 Ex Parte Smith et al 12999185 - (D) TOWNSEND 103 MOORE & VAN ALLEN PLLC STEADMAN, DAVID J
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1732 Ex Parte MILLER 13483596 - (D) HASTINGS 103 Merchant & Gould - Chevron MAYES, MELVIN C
1736 Ex Parte Bruggendick et al 12384159 - (D) GAUDETTE 102/103 K&L Gates LLP-Charlotte WALCK, BRIAND
1772 Ex Parte Digne et al 13060457 - (D) BEST 103 MILLEN, WHITE, ZELANO & BRANIGAN, P.C. LOUIE, PHILIP Y
1781 Ex Parte Busch et al 12295131 - (D) ROSS 103 Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP (WM) FERGUSON, LAWRENCE D
Moreover, we find no evidence that the Examiner relies on impermissible hindsight reasoning as the Examiner's articulated reasons for combining the teachings of Narita, Sawai, and Tokiwa are supported by the prior art disclosures themselves. See, e.g., Sensonics, Inc. v. Aerosonic Corp., 81 F.3d 1566, 1570 (Fed. Cir. 1996) (citing Interconnect Planning Corp. v. Feil, 774 F.2d 1132, 1138 (Fed. Cir. 1985)) ("The invention must be viewed not after the blueprint has been drawn by the inventor, but as it would have been perceived in the state of the art that existed at the time the invention was made.").
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2174 Ex Parte Liesche et al 11865754 - (D) GALLIGAN 101/103 DELIZIO LAW, PLLC BM AUSTIN IPLA W (DL) FIBBI, CHRISTOPHER J
Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2487 Ex Parte AHN 13219114 - (D) HUME 103 THE FARRELL LAW FIRM, P,C OWENS, TSION B
2488 Ex Parte GunasekaranBabu et al 12642944 - (D) HORVATH 103 HONEYWELL/HUSCH PE, GEEPY
Tech Center 2600 Communications
2641 Ex Parte Gerber et al 13019282 - (D) NAPPI 102/103 Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP HOLLIDAY, JAIME MICHELE
2669 Ex Parte Holland et al 12256962 - (D) HOMERE 101/103 ALSTON & BIRD LLP BITAR, NANCY
Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3618 Ex Parte King et al 11742890 - (D) CAPP 103 BROOKS KUSHMAN P,CJFG1L VANAMAN, FRANK BENNETT
3686 Ex Parte Jung et al 11824529 - (D) MEDLOCK 103 Constellation Law Group, PLLC REYES, REGINALD R
Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3745 Ex Parte McMahan et al 12719674 - (D) WOODS 103 Fletcher Yoder PC GE Power & Water LEGENDRE, CHRISTOPHER RY AN
3777 Ex Parte Chernov et al 13108129 - (D) PER CURIAM 103 41.50 103 Covidien LP KINNARD, LISA M
SEARCH
PTAB.US: Decisions of PTAB Patent Trial and Appeal Board
Li & Cai
Tuesday, November 8, 2016
Subscribe to:
Post Comments
(
Atom
)
No comments :
Post a Comment