aslanian, merck, keller, klosak, mcclain, fout, siebentritt

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1729 Ex Parte Young et al 11853855 - (D) HASTINGS 103 37 C.F.R. 41.50(b) 102 FRASER CLEMENS MARTIN & MILLER LLC DUDLEY, ARCHER DAVIS

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1755 Ex Parte Weiss et al 12288560 - (D) HANLON 103 103 M.P. Williams PILLAY, DEVINA

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3643 Ex Parte Muthiah et al 10873501 - (D) HORNER 103 103 GERALD K. WHITE & ASSOCIATES, P.C. NGUYEN, SON T

See also In re Aslanian, 590 F.2d 911, 914 (CCPA 1979) (“a drawing in a utility patent can be cited against the claims of a utility patent application even though the feature shown in the drawing was unintended or unexplained in the specification of the reference patent.”) (citations omitted).

Aslanian, In re, 590 F.2d 911, 200 USPQ 500 (CCPA 1979) 2125

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design

3774 Ex Parte Ryan et al 12059495 - (D) SPAHN 102/103 103 Medtronic, Inc. (CRDM) MATTHEWS, WILLIAM H

We are not persuaded by Appellants’ arguments because one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on a combination of references. See In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 1097 (Fed. Cir. 1986); In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 425 (CCPA 1981).

Merck & Co., Inc., In re, 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986) 707.07(f), 716.02,  2143.02,  2144.08,  2144.09, 2145

Keller, In re, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981) 707.07(f), 2145

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1729 Ex Parte Skinlo 10665687 - (D) HASTINGS 103 QUALLION LLC RUDDOCK, ULA CORINNA

1762 Ex Parte Stueven et al 12438835 - (D) McKELVEY 103 MARSHALL, GERSTEIN & BORUN LLP ENG, ELIZABETH

In order to rely on an alleged expected result (or a "substantial effect"), applicant must show that it in fact gets that result. In re Klosak, 455 F.2d 1077, 1080 (CCPA 1972) (inventor must show that the results the inventor says the inventor gets with the invention are actually obtained with the invention). See also McClain v. Ortmayer, 141 U.S. 419, 429 (1891) (conclusive evidence needed to establish new function).

1763 Ex Parte Okada et al 12531655 - (D) McKELVEY 102/103 Styron/BHGL USELDING, JOHN E

1771 Ex Parte Nguyen et al 12019276 - (D) NAGUMO 102/103 Mossman, Kumar and Tyler, PC STEIN, MICHELLE

1774 Ex Parte Zetlmeisl et al 11601401 - (D) METZ 103 Mossman, Kumar and Tyler, PC ROBINSON, RENEE E

1784 Ex Parte Munro et al 11758765 - (D) NAGUMO 103 PPG INDUSTRIES INC MCNEIL, JENNIFER C

1785 Ex Parte Hood 11546067 - (D) OBERMANN 103 INTERNATIONAL SPECIALTY PRODUCTS SHEWAREGED, BETELHEM

Where two known alternatives are interchangeable for a desired function, an express suggestion to substitute one for the other is not needed to render a substitution obvious. In re Fout, 675 F.2d 297, 301 (CCPA 1982); In re Siebentritt, 372 F.2d 566, 568 (CCPA 1967).

Fout, In re, 675 F.2d 297, 213 USPQ 532 (CCPA 1982) 2129, 2143.01, 2144.06

1791 Ex Parte Ikuina et al 11498154 - (D) GAUDETTE 103 BUCHANAN, INGERSOLL & ROONEY PC PADEN, CAROLYN A

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2167 Ex Parte Lim 11615637 - (D) DANG 103 AKA CHAN LLP REYES, MARIELA D

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2421 Ex Parte Lee 11353584 - (D) MANTIS MERCADER 103 THE DIRECTV GROUP, INC. PARRY, CHRISTOPHER L

2477 Ex Parte Sadot 11238924 - (D) EVANS 102/103 Cochran Freund & Young/ AVAYA, Inc. ZHOU, YONG

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2829 Ex Parte SONG et al 11564760 - (D) WHITEHEAD, JR. 103 VOLENTINE & WHITT PLLC CHI, SUBERR L

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3777 Ex Parte McGee 11117022 - (D) WALSH 112(1)/103 SEAGER, TUFTE & WICKHEM, LLC LUONG, PETER
 
REEXAMINATION  

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU)
2863 GARRY IAN HOLLOWAY Requester and Appellant v. GEMOLOGICAL INSTITUTE OF AMERICA, INC. Patent Owner and Respondent 95001542 7,571,060 10/952,386 SIU 102/103 DLA PIPER US LLP NASSER, ROBERT L original LE, JOHN H

Heyna, McClain

custom search

VACATED
Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3777 Ex Parte Gleich et al 10552774 - (D) SNEDDEN 102 37 C.F.R § 41.50(b) 112(2) PHILIPS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY & STANDARDS GUPTA, VANI



REVERSED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1627 Ex Parte Seifert et al 10147100 - (D) SNEDDEN 103 MUETING, RAASCH & GEBHARDT, P.A. CLAYTOR, DEIRDRE RENEE

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2112 Ex Parte Julian et al 11020583 - (D) CHEN 102/103 QUALCOMM INCORPORATED AHMED, ENAM

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3657 Ex Parte Drabe et al 11484250 - (D) WOOD 103 YOUNG BASILE BURCH, MELODY M

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3711 Ex Parte Svatovic 11397977 - (D) STAICOVICI 101 ZARKO SVATOVIC MENDIRATTA, VISHU K

3773 Ex Parte Kissel et al 10837281 - (D) SNEDDEN 102/103 KLAUS J. BACH & ASSOCIATES OU, JING RUI

3779 Ex Parte Saadat et al 10824936 - (D) SNEDDEN 102/103 USGI Medical, Inc. KASZTEJNA, MATTHEW JOHN

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2175 Ex Parte Imhof 10463818 - (D) McKONE 103 103 Siemens Corporation PHANTANA ANGKOOL, DAVID

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3767 Ex Parte Keimel 11124984 - (D) FREDMAN 103 103 Medtronic, Inc. (CRDM) GILBERT, ANDREW M

3767 Ex Parte Hood et al 11450159 - (D) FREDMAN 102/103 102/103 IV - SUITER SWANTZ PC LLO SCHMIDT, EMILY LOUISE

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1647 Ex Parte Hagen 11544056 - (D) WALSH 103 WYETH LLC SHUKLA, RAM R

1648 Ex Parte Howley et al 12038141 - (D) GRIMES 103 LAW OFFICE OF SALVATORE ARRIGO AND SCOTT LEE, LLP CHEN, STACY BROWN

Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1716 Ex Parte Ruby et al 11293346 - (D) SCHAFER 103 Vista IP Law Group LLP LUND, JEFFRIE ROBERT

1762 Ex Parte Haerzschel et al 11686037 - (D) McKELVEY 103 BROOKS KUSHMAN P.C. SASTRI, SATYA B

In re Heyna, 360 F.2d 222, 228 (CCPA 1966) ("It was incumbent upon appellants to submit clear and convincing evidence to support their allegation of unexpected property."). See also McClain v. Ortmayer, 141 U.S. 419, 429 (1891) (conclusive evidence needed to establish new function)

1764 Ex Parte Tammaji et al 11986908 - (D) McKELVEY 103 Charles Muserlain BOYLE, ROBERT C

1786 Ex Parte Haigh et al 11748681 - (D) DELMENDO 103 INVISTA NORTH AMERICA S.A.R.L. CHRISS, JENNIFER A

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2168 Ex Parte Karimisetty et al 10731604 - (D) PARVIS 103 Oracle Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP MORRISON, JAY A

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2644 Ex Parte Sammarco 11380451 - (D) DIXON 103 MOORE AND VAN ALLEN PLLC FOR SEMC EDOUARD, PATRICK NESTOR

2646 Ex Parte Kim 11489014 - (D) COURTENAY 103 THE FARRELL LAW FIRM, P.C. WANG-HURST, KATHY W

2691 Ex Parte Tai et al 11136883 - (D) FRAHM 103 Avago Technologies Limited Kathy Manke SHERMAN, STEPHEN G

2696 Ex Parte Maeng et al 11486814 - (D) COURTENAY 103 Innovation Counsel LLP CHOWDHURY, AFROZA Y

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2881 Ex Parte Clemmer et al 11286608 - (D) HUME 103 BARNES & THORNBURG LLP JOHNSTON, PHILLIP A

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3684 Ex Parte Low et al 12237060 - (D) MEDLOCK 103 Haynes and Boone, LLP FIELDS, BENJAMIN S

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3767 Ex Parte Sage 11799165 - (D) FREDMAN 103 MUETING, RAASCH & GEBHARDT, P.A. PATEL, SHEFALI DILIP

hall, heyna, mcclain, passal, lohr, muchmore

REVERSED

1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1612 Ex Parte Chen et al 11/193,444 GRIMES 103(a) OBLON, SPIVAK, MCCLELLAND MAIER & NEUSTADT, L.L.P. EXAMINER SHOMER, ISAAC

1618 Ex Parte Knight Castro et al 10/510,454 MILLS 103(a) Tim A Cheatham Mallinckrodt Inc EXAMINER PERREIRA, MELISSA JEAN

Because there are many ways in which a reference may be disseminated to the interested public, "public accessibility‟ has been called the touchstone in determining whether a reference constitutes a "printed publication‟ bar under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b). . . . The proponent of the publication bar must show that prior to the critical date the reference was sufficiently accessible, at least to the public interested in the art, so that such a one by examining the reference could make the claimed invention without further research or experimentation. In re Hall, 781 F.2d 897, 898-899 (Fed. Cir. 1986).Hall, In re, 781 F.2d 897, 228 USPQ 453 (Fed. Cir. 1986). . . . . . . . . .2128, 2128.01, 2128.02

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2177 Ex Parte Ye et al 10/689,186 DESHPANDE 102(b)/112(1) RYAN, MASON & LEWIS, LLP EXAMINER HILLERY, NATHAN

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3731 Ex Parte Thompson et al 10/943,221 FREDMAN 102(b) WELSH FLAXMAN & GITLER LLC EXAMINER SEVERSON, RYAN J

3761 Ex Parte Sperl et al 11/026,423 PRATS 103(a) Christopher M. Goff (27839) ARMSTRONG TEASDALE LLP EXAMINER HAND, MELANIE JO
AFFIRMED-IN-PART

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3625 Ex Parte Malitski 11/212,317 KIM 102(b) 102(b) SAP/BSTZ BLAKELY SOKOLOFF TAYLOR & ZAFMAN LLP EXAMINER LEVINE, ADAM L
AFFIRMED

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1711 Ex Parte Classen et al 11/640,514 GUADETTE 102(b)/103(a) BSH HOME APPLIANCES CORPORATION EXAMINER KO, JASON Y

1766 Ex Parte Henning et al 11/771,496 McKELVEY 103 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 112(1) FROMMER LAWRENCE & HAUG EXAMINER NEGRELLI, KARA B

Applicable precedent requires an applicant attempting to show unexpected results to establish its case with clear and convincing evidence. In re Heyna, 360 F.2d 222, 228 (CCPA 1966) ("It was incumbent upon appellants to submit clear and convincing evidence to support their allegation of unexpected property."). See also McClain v. Ortmayer, 141 U.S. 419, 429 (1891) (conclusive evidence needed to establish new function); In re Passal, 426 F.2d 409, 412 (CCPA 1970) ("Certainly, at least, that 'clear and convincing evidence' of unexpected properties required by this court in In re Lohr . . . is lacking.") and In re Lohr, 317 F.2d 388, 392 (CCPA 1963)( "When a new compound so closely related to a prior art compound as to be structurally obvious is sought to be patented based on the alleged greater effectiveness of the new compound for the same purpose as the old compound, clear and convincing evidence of substantially greater effectiveness is needed.")

...

In re Muchmore, 433 F.2d 824, 826 (CCPA 1970) (claims which include obvious subject matter and non-obvious subject matter are not patentable under § 103).
1785 Ex Parte Tran et al 11/103,827 PER CURIAM 103(a) HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY EXAMINER HIGGINS, GERARD T

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3733 Ex Parte Roth et al 10/992,261 SCHEINER 102(e)/103(a) FAY KAPLUN & MARCIN, LLP EXAMINER HOFFMAN, MARY C

3737 Ex Parte Camus et al 11/500,536 WALSH 103(a) SIEMENS CORPORATION EXAMINER SMITH, RUTH S

3774 Ex Parte Ta et al 11/104,862 BAHR 103(a) FULWIDER PATTON LLP EXAMINER GANESAN, SUBA