baxter travenol, millennium

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1625 Ex Parte Kowarsch et al 12527706 - (D) PRATS 103 OBLON, MCCLELLAND, MAIER & NEUSTADT, L.L.P. O DELL, DAVID K

1634 Ex Parte Ionescu-Zanetti et al 13183271 - (D) FREDMAN 103 DORSEY & WHITNEY LLP - Seattle CROW, ROBERT THOMAS

Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1736 Ex Parte ASANO et al 13864777 - (D) RANGE 102 FLYNN THIEL, P.C. WALCK, BRIAN D

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2627 Ex Parte Westerman et al 12852133 - (D) CLEMENTS 103 APPLE c/o MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP LA MUMMALANENI, MRUNALINI YERNENI

2664 Ex Parte Eromaki 13628425 - (D) CRAIG 102 Harrington & Smith, Attorneys At Law, LLC MOREHEAD III, JOHN H

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2822 Ex Parte FUJIMOTO et al 14089489 - (D) DENNETT 103 MCDERMOTT WILL & EMERY LLP MIYOSHI, JESSE Y

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3623 Ex Parte Vermette 11742957 - (D) SHAW 101 Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP/Oracle STERRETT, JONATHAN G

3623 Ex Parte Wilson et al 11856675 - (D) LORIN 101/103 SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP (DXC) MARCUS, LELAND R

3685 Ex Parte Paschini et al 12786403 - (D) SILVERMAN 101/103 Blackhawk Network, Inc. WINTER, JOHN M

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3723 Ex Parte Wu 14485884 - (D) MURPHY 103 KAMRATH IP Lawfirm, PA SHAKERI, HADI

3763 Ex Parte Henriksson 14404536 - (D) MURPHY 103 NIXON & VANDERHYE, PC LEO, LEONARD R

3771 Ex Parte Lucido 14166469 - (D) LEBOVITZ 103 Michael Victor Lucido BOUTSIKARIS, SOCRATES L

3774 Ex Parte Andriacchi et al 12815730 - (D) ADAMS 103 Schwegman Lundberg & Woessner/ Zimmer PELLEGRINO, BRIAN E

3774 Ex Parte Wintsch et al 13090479 - (D) FLAX 102 Wagenknecht IP Law Group, PC SCHALL, MATTHEW WAYNE

3791 Ex Parte Van Duyne et al 13303815 - (D) NEW 103 Casimir Jones, S.C. FARDANESH, MARJAN

3794 Ex Parte Sutermeister et al 14076769 - (D) LEBOVITZ 102/103 KACVINSKY DAISAK BLUNI PLLC HUPCZEY, JR, RONALD JAMES

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1616 Ex Parte HUEFFER et al 13720035 - (D) FREDMAN 112(4)/103 112(2)/103 OBLON, MCCLELLAND, MAIER & NEUSTADT, L.L.P. SHIN, MONICA A

We agree with Appellants that when an obviousness rejection is based on a combination of components in the prior art reference as in the instant situation, the comparison to show unexpected results need only be between the closest prior art reference and the claimed invention. In re Baxter Travenol Labs., 952 F.2d 388, 392 (Fed. Cir. 1991). It need not be between the claimed invention and the invention suggested by the combined teachings in the prior art reference or references. "Unexpected results are shown in comparison to what was known, not what was unknown." Millennium Pharm., Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., 862 F.3d 1356, 1368 (Fed. Cir. 2017). Appellants were "not required to create the [claimed invention], when the product had not been created in the prior art." Id. 

Baxter Travenol Labs., In re, 952 F.2d 388, 21 USPQ2d 1281 (Fed. Cir. 1991) 2131.01 , 2145

1637 Ex Parte Xi et al 13213427 - (D) TOWNSEND 103 103 LIFE TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION BERTAGNA, ANGELA MARIE

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2161 Ex Parte Cammert et al 12929539 - (D) SILVERMAN 112(2) 103 NIXON & VANDERHYE, PC HOLLAND, SHERYLL

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2658 Ex Parte Maddison 14678076 - (D) SZPONDOWSKI 102 102/103 Fritzsche Patent c/o Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney PC (SEN) OPSASNICK, MICHAEL N

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3791 Ex Parte Gibson et al 14164840 - (D) LEBOVITZ 112(2)/103 103 41.50 103 HILL-ROM SERVICES, INC. KOLDERMAN, NICHOLAS E

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1618 Ex Parte Maitland et al 14307691 - (D) SCHNEIDER 112(1)/102 103 Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC VU, JAKE MINH

1619 Ex Parte RUBIN 13973394 - (D) SCHNEIDER 103/OTDP M&B IP Analysts, LLC PROSSER, ALISSA J

1625 Ex Parte Bland et al 13919035 - (D) LAVIER 103/OTDP DAS/Maschoff Brennan MORRIS, PATRICIA L

1627 Ex Parte Damaj et al 13991111 - (D) ADAMS 103/OTDP Mintz Levin/San Diego Office NEAGU, IRINA

1627 Ex Parte Perovitch et al 13140745 - (D) FREDMAN 102 103 SUGHRUE MION, PLLC MCMILLIAN, KARA RENITA

Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1717 Ex Parte Grimminger et al 14553600 - (D) HASTINGS 103 NORTON ROSE FULBRIGHT US LLP HERNANDEZ-DIAZ, JOSE

1733 Ex Parte ISEDA et al 13429966 - (D) CASHION 102/103/OTDP CLARK & BRODY YANG, JIE

1734 Ex Parte Dahl et al 13501164 - (D) DELMENDO 112(1)/103 Norris McLaughlin & Marcus, PA NGUYEN, NGOC YEN M

1763 Ex Parte Langlotz et al 14402577 - (D) REN 103 CURATOLO SIDOTI CO., LPA USELDING, JOHN E

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2834 Ex Parte EL-Refaie et al 14252893 - (D) GAUDETTE 103 GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY ANDREWS, MICHAEL

2859 Ex Parte BRANDNER et al 12683708 - (D) INGLESE 103 CROWELL & MORING LLP BERHANU, SAMUEL

2897 Ex Parte YAMAZAKI et al 13735424 - (D) SZPONDOWSKI 103 Robinson Intellectual Property Law Office, P.C. GRAY, AARON J

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3616 Ex Parte SOO et al 14607323 - (D) BAHR 103 BROOKS KUSHMAN P.C./FGTL VANAMAN, FRANK BENNETT

3623 Ex Parte Boss et al 12203399 - (D) FETTING 101 Driggs, Hogg, Daugherty & Del Zoppo Co., LP.A. BROCKINGTON III, WILLIAMS

3623 Ex Parte Dalton 12239316 - (D) LORIN 101 ENTIT SOFTWARE LLC MARCUS, LELAND R

3623 Ex Parte LEE et al 13193962 - (D) BISK 101/103 GREENBLUM & BERNSTEIN, P.L.C. STERRETT, JONATHAN G

3623 Ex Parte Stibel et al 14140158 - (D) COURTENAY 112(2) 103 OHLANDT, GREELEY, RUGGIERO & PERLE, LLP GUILIANO, CHARLES A

3624 Ex Parte Enyeart et al 11624785 - (D) LORIN 101/103 SCULLY, SCOTT, MURPHY & PRESSER, P.C. GOLDBERG, IV AN R

3624 Ex Parte Miller 11894254 - (D) FETTING 101/103 LERNER, DAVID, LITTENBERG, KRUMHOLZ & MENTLIK GOLDBERG, IVAN R

3628 Ex Parte Addae et al 12145631 - (D) MEDLOCK 101 CANTOR COLBURN LLP-IBM POUGHKEEPSIE JOSEPH, TONY A S

3667 Ex Parte Multer et al 11463779 - (D) LORIN 112(4)/103 101 Meister Seelig & Fein LLP GREGG, MARY M

3667 Ex Parte Multer et al 13964946 - (D) WIEDER 102/103 101 Meister Seelig & Fein LLP BADII, BEHRANG

3668 Ex Parte CHEN et al 14281586 - (D) FETTING 101 MEYERTONS, HOOD, KIVLIN, KOWERT & GOETZEL, P.C. REFAI, RAMSEY

3681 Ex Parte Novikov et al 13620318 - (D) LORIN 101 Facebook/Fenwick LI, SUN M

3682 Ex Parte Gardner et al 11821770 - (D) FETTING 101 BROWN, LUIS A BROWN, LUIS A

3683 Ex Parte BARHATE et al 13425608 - (D) FRAHM 112(2)/101/102/103 HATCHER, DEIRDRE D HATCHER, DEIRDRE D

3683 Ex Parte Narasimhan et al 10884394 - (D) MEDLOCK 101 FOLEY HOAG, LLP (General) LOFTIS, JOHNNA RONEE

3687 Ex Parte Hathaway et al 13452553 - (D) FETTING 101 LUDWIG, PETER L LUDWIG, PETER L

3689 Ex Parte DeFolo et al 11020058 - (D) LORIN 103 101 Hewlett Packard Enterprise NGUYEN, TAND

3692 Ex Parte Hammock et al 14052715 - (D) SILVERMAN 101/103 Finnegan/Capital One MADAMBA, CLIFFORD B

3696 Ex Parte SHOWALTER 14286039 - (D) SZPONDOWSKI 103 101 Muncy, Geissler, Olds & Lowe, P.C. CoreLogic113027 HOLLY, JOHN H

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3716 Ex Parte Elias et al 13943999 - (D) JESCHKE 101 Gamesys Ltd. c/o Fincham Downs, LLC KIM, KEVIN Y

3726 Ex Parte Schwager et al 13779683 - (D) HOELTER 103 BAKER BOTTS L.L.P. TRAVERS, MATTHEW P

3741 Ex Parte Lallement et al 13764538 - (D) SCHOPPER 102 112(2)/103 Hovey Williams LLP KIM,TAEJUN

3745 Ex Parte Duelm et al 13723941 - (D) SHAH 103 CARLSON, GASKEY & OLDS/PRATT & WHITNEY SEHN, MICHAEL L

3774 Ex Parte Coughlin et al 13724600 - (D) NEW 103 CARLSON, GASKEY & OLDS, P.C. BAHENA, CHRISTIE L.

kao2, baxter travenol, merchant

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2163 Ex Parte LI et al 13309300 - (D) BUSCH 103 Vista IP Law Group, LLP (Oracle) BLACK, LINH

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2847 Ex Parte Brown et al 14310413 - (D) GUPTA 103 ULMER & BERNE LLP NGUYEN, CHAU N

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3646 Ex Parte Hyde et al 12462332 - (D) CALVE 102/103 HolzerlPLaw, PC BURKE, SEAN P

3688 Ex Parte McElfresh et al 13617647 - (D) CRAWFORD 101/112(2)/102/103 BGL/Yahoo Holdings STIBLEY, MICHAEL R

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3741 Ex Parte Moehrle et al 13241443 - (D) BROWN 112(4)/103 SIEMENS CORPORATION BURKE, THOMAS P

3749 Ex Parte Martinchick et al 12121832 - (D) HORNER 112(2)/101/103 MacMillan, Sobanski & Todd, LLC - GM DECKER, PHILLIP

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3727 Ex Parte Reindle et al 14175421 - (D) LANEY 112(1)/112(2)/103 103 Michael Best & Friedrich LLP (TTiFC) MULLER, BRYAN R

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1764 Ex Parte TAKAHASHI et al 12353689 - (D) PAK 103 HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP HUHN, RICHARD A

1771 Ex Parte Ravishankar et al 13056246 - (D) FRANKLIN 103 POLSINELLI PC OLADAPO, TAIWO

As such, we turn to Appellants’ evidence of criticality, and we agree with the Examiner’s stated position in the record that Appellants’ showing of unexpected results is not convincing because the comparison made must be with the closet prior art such as Brant.2 Ans. 12—13. “[W]hen unexpected results are used as evidence of nonobviousness, the results must be shown to be unexpected compared with the closest prior art.”Kao Corp. v. Unilever U.S., Inc., 441 F.3d 963, 970 (Fed. Cir. 2006) quotingIn Re Baxter Travenol Labs., 952 F.2d 388, 392 (Fed. Cir. 1991). As a general guideline, the closest prior art is the reference that has the most claim limitations in common with the invention, bearing in mind the relative importance of particular limitations.In re Merchant, 575 F.2d 865, 868 (CCPA 1978).
Baxter Travenol Labs., In re, 952 F.2d 388, 21 USPQ2d 1281 (Fed. Cir. 1991) 2131.01 , 2145

Merchant, In re, 575 F.2d 865, 197 USPQ 785 (CCPA 1978) 716.02(e)

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2461 Ex Parte Liu et al 14281124 - (D) SAADAT 103 SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP MATTIS, JASON E

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2875 Ex Parte Gibson III et al 14007336 - (D) SQUIRE 103 PHILIPS LIGHTING HOLDING B.V. HORIKOSHI, STEVEN Y

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3629 Ex Parte TROPP 13412233 - (D) FISCHETTI 103 112(1)/101 COOPER & DUNHAM, LLP JASMIN, LYNDA C

3637 Ex Parte Burgess et al 14531108 - (D) REPKO 103 STANDLEY LAW GROUP LLP ROERSMA, ANDREW MARK

3671 Ex Parte OHKUBO et al 14029497 - (D) MURPHY 103 DITTHAVONG & STEINER, P.C. MAYO-PINNOCK, TARA LEIGH

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3747 Ex Parte Hayman et al 13181981 - (D) CAPP 103 Cantor Colburn LLP-General Motors ZALESKAS, JOHNM

3753 Ex Parte Labrie et al 13103589 - (D) KERINS 102 CARLSON, GASKEY & OLDS, P.C. SANCHEZ-MEDINA, REINALDO

3761 Ex Parte Sutorius 13116992 - (D) SMEGAL 102/103 GREENBERG TRAURIG (LV) SASS, SARA A

3762 Ex Parte Polefko et al 13250283 - (D) COTTA 103 Pearne & Gordon LLP Greatbatch (QiG) LEVICKY, WILLIAM J

3778 Ex Parte Jafari et al 13059711 - (D) SHAH 102/103 101 Covidien LP BRYANT, ERIC C

baxter travenol

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1782 Ex Parte Mukunoki et al 12342686 - (D) HANLON 102 BUCHANAN, INGERSOLL & ROONEY PC HON, SOW FUN

"Anticipation is a question of fact" and "factual determinations by the PTO must be based on a preponderance of the evidence." In re Baxter Travenol Lab., 952 F.2d 388, 390 (Fed. Cir. 1991); In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 1449 (Fed. Cir. 1992). A "preponderance of evidence" is defined as "evidence which as a whole shows that the fact sought to be proved is more probable than not." Black's Law Dictionary 1064 (5th ed. 1979).

Baxter Travenol Labs., In re, 952 F.2d 388, 21 USPQ2d 1281 (Fed. Cir. 1991) 2131.01 , 2145

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2439 Ex Parte Marzetta et al 12652372 - (D) ENGLE 103 RYAN, MASON & LEWIS, LLP KABIR, JAHANGIR

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2625 Ex Parte Li 12787763 - (D) ENGELS 102/103 NIXON PEABODY LLP SHAPIRO, LEONID

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3649 Ex Parte REYHAN et al 12415600 - (D) CALVE 103 Roberts Mlotkowski Safran Cole & Calderon, P,C, HARMON, CHRISTOPHER R

3694 Ex Parte Satyavolu et al 13180511 - (D) MEDLOCK 102/103 GTC Law Group PC & Affiliates (Trnaxis, Inc,) TRAN, HAI

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3727 Ex Parte Blake 10914878 - (D) HOFFMANN 103 TAROLLI, SUNDHEIM, COVELL & TUMMINO L.L.P. WILSON, LEED

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1616 Ex Parte Zhang et al 12702846 - (D) NEW 103 FMC CORPORATION CHOI, FRANK I

1624 Ex Parte Singh et al 12958284 - (D) McCOLLUM 112(1) 103/double patenting Bozicevic, Field & Francis LLP Rigel Pharmaceuticals, Inc, RAO, DEEPAK R

1631 Ex Parte Budaraju et al 12771496 - (D) JENKS 103 Rockwell Automation, Inc./FY HARWARD, SOREN T

1673 Ex Parte Manners et al 11289240 - (D) LEBOVITZ 103 USDA-ARS-OFFICE OF TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER GOON, SCARLETT Y

Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1722 Ex Parte Roelle et al 12569184 - (D) PAK double patenting 102/double patenting Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP (WM) ANGEBRANNDT, MARTIN J

1782 Ex Parte Wang et al 13219984 - (D) HANLON 103 KIMBERLY-CLARK WORLDWIDE, INC. SANDERSON, LEE E

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2683 Ex Parte Nadeem et al 13232248 - (D) HOMERE 103 SIEMENS CORPORATION NGUYEN, LAURA N

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2826 Ex Parte Middlekauff et al 13225263 - (D) ANKENBRAND 103 VIERRA MAGEN/SANDISK CORPORATION ERDEM, FAZLI

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3715 Ex Parte STEARNS 13415485 - (D) BROWN 101/112(4)/102 112(2)/103 41.50 112(2) SINORICA, LLC BULLINGTON, ROBERT P

3771 Ex Parte Fenn et al 11720490 - (D) DOUGAL 103 3M INNOVATIVE PROPERTIES COMPANY YOUNG, RACHEL T

REHEARING

DENIED
Tech Center 2600 Communications
2636 Ex Parte Cole et al 13252141 - (D) KUMAR 103 Maschoff Brennan LIU, LI

2673 Ex Parte Chakra et al 13169998 - (D) COURTENAY 103 CRGOLAW WALLACE, JOHN R

soni, baxter travenol, applied materials

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2126 Ex Parte Hsu et al 12731348 - (D) THOMAS 103 HAYNES AND BOONE, LLP GARLAND, STEVEN R

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3634 Ex Parte Clark et al 11983091 - (D) BAYAT 103 JELD-WEN, Inc. c/o Stoel Rives LLP RAMSEY, JEREMY C

We next turn to Appellants’ attempt to rebut the prima facie case of obviousness by evidence “of ‘unexpected results,’ i.e., to show that the claimed invention exhibits some superior property or advantage that person of ordinary skill in the relevant art would have found surprising or unexpected.” In re Soni, 54 F.3d 746, 750 (Fed. Cir. 1995). “[W]hen unexpected results are used as evidence of nonobviousness, the results must be shown to be unexpected compared with the closest prior art.” In re Baxter Travenol Labs., 952 F.2d 388, 392 (Fed. Cir. 1991). The unexpected results must be “different in kind and not merely in degree from the results of the prior art.” In re Applied Materials, Inc., 692 F.3d 1289, 1297 (Fed. Cir. 2012).

Soni, In re, 54 F.3d 746, 34 USPQ2d 1684 (Fed. Cir. 1995) 707.07(f) , 2145

Baxter Travenol Labs., In re, 952 F.2d 388, 21 USPQ2d 1281 (Fed. Cir. 1991) 2131.01 , 2145

REEXAMINATION

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1787 MEDTRONIC VASCULAR, INC. Requester and Cross-Appellant v. MEDTECH CAPITAL VENTURES, LLC Patent Owner and Appellant Ex Parte 7,749,585 et al 10/688,292 95001484 - (D) GUEST 102/103 Hershkovitz and Associates, PLLC THIRD-PARTY REQUESTER: SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP TILL, TERRENCE R original JACKSON, MONIQUE R

skoner, baxter travenol

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1742 Ex Parte Etesse 12568205 - (D) WARREN 103 THE PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY HUSON, MONICA ANNE

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2649 Ex Parte Khitun et al 12049040 - (D) STRAUSS 103 Vista IP Law Group LLP SHERIF, FATUMA G

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1627 Ex Parte Schiene et al 12879562 - (D) FREDMAN 103 CROWELL & MORING LLP KANTAMNENI, SHOBHA

"Expected beneficial results are evidence of obviousness of a claimed invention.  Just as unexpected beneficial results are evidence of unobviousness."  In re Skoner, 517 F.2d 947, 950 (CCPA 1975). ...

"[W]hen unexpected results are used as evidence of nonobviousness, the results must be shown to be unexpected compared with the closest prior art."  In re Baxter Travenol Labs., 952 F.2d 388, 392 (Fed.Cir. 1991).

Baxter Travenol Labs., In re, 952 F.2d 388, 21 USPQ2d 1281 (Fed. Cir. 1991) 2131.01 , 2145

baxter travenol

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2167 Ex Parte Stallings 12171714 - (D) DEJMEK 102 Schwegman Lundberg & Woessner / Raytheon BROMELL, ALEXANDRIA Y

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3682 Ex Parte Stetson et al 11972837 - (D) MEDLOCK 103 DENTONS US LLP ALVAREZ, RAQUEL

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2162 Ex Parte Lim 11966419 - (D) SHIANG 102 102/103 Charles A. Rattner FLEURANTIN, JEAN B

Appellant fails to show reversable error because Appellant fails to provide adequate analysis to rebut such Examiner's findings.  As a result, such Examiner's findings are undisputed.  See In re Baxter Travenol Labs., 952 F.2d 388, 391 (Fed. Cir. 1991) ("It is not the function of this court [or thisBoard] to examine the claims in greater detail than argued by an appellant, looking for [patentable] ... distinctions over the prior art.").

Baxter Travenol Labs., In re, 952 F.2d 388, 21 USPQ2d 1281 (Fed. Cir. 1991) 2131.01 , 2145

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2468 Ex Parte Diebel 11992527 - (D) SHIANG 103 103 Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney PC (SEN) Fritzsche Patent NAWAZ, ASAD M

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3623 Ex Parte Tomastik et al 11618802 - (D) BAYAT 112(1)/112(2)/103 101 Bachman & LaPointe, P.C. SWARTZ, STEPHEN S

3673 Ex Parte Keil et al 12102425 - (D) HOFFMANN 103 103 Midmark Corporation c/o Frost Brown Todd LLC CONLEY, FREDRICK C

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1726 Ex Parte Nagasaki et al 11587261 - (D) GARRIS 103 McDermott Will and Emery LLP LEWIS, BEN

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2427 Ex Parte McManus et al 12284759 - (D) KAISER 102/103 PANASONIC AUTOMOTIVE SYSTEM COMPANY OF AMERICA LANGHNOJA, KUNAL N

2447 Ex Parte Adams et al 11227607 - (D) KHAN 103 RIDOUT & MAYBEE LLP TANG, KAREN C

2451 Ex Parte Smith 12075731 - (D) KHAN 103 RGIP LLC TIV, BACKHEAN

2468 Ex Parte Mickle et al 11321556 - (D) LENTIVECH 103 AT&T Legal Department - CC CHU, WUTCHUNG

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3693 Ex Parte Ramos et al 11196730 - (D) KIM 103 37 CFR 41.50(b) 103 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman, LLP (NV) BORLINGHAUS, JASON M

baxter travenol, Net MoneyIN, atmel

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1786 Ex Parte Howard 12135254 - (D) ANKENBRAND 103 E I DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY THOMPSON, CAMIE S

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2433 Ex Parte Verma et al 12057950 - (D) FISHMAN 103 Whitham, Curtis, & Christofferson, P.C. ANDERSON, MICHAEL D

2481 Ex Parte Shlissel et al 10498888 - (D) NAPPI 103 Husch Blackwell LLP Husch Blackwell Sanders LLP Welsh & Katz JONES, HEATHER RAE

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1789 Ex Parte Wesson et al 12089764 - (D) PAK 102/103 102/103 CARLSON GASKEY & OLDS GRAY, JILL M

“[E]xtrinsic evidence may be considered [in the anticipation rejection] when it is used to explain, but not expand, the meaning of a reference.” In re Baxter Travenol Labs., 952 F.2d 388, 390 (Fed. Cir. 1991). Nevertheless, “differences between the prior art reference and a claimed invention, however slight, invoke the question of obviousness, not anticipation.” Net MoneyIN, Inc. v. VeriSign, Inc., 545 F.3d 1359, 1371 (Fed. Cir. 2008). To prevail in an appeal to this Board, Appellant must adequately explain or identify reversible error in the Examiner’s § 102 rejections.

Baxter Travenol Labs., In re, 952 F.2d 388, 21 USPQ2d 1281 (Fed. Cir. 1991) 2131.01 , 2145

Net MoneyIN, Inc. v. VeriSign, Inc., 545 F.3d 1359, 88 USPQ2d 1751 (Fed. Cir. 2008) 2152.02(b)

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2443 Ex Parte Renschler et al 12134688 - (D) HORVATH 112(2)/103 112(2)/103 QUALCOMM INCORPORATED JOHN, CLARENCE

“[I]n order for a claim to meet the particularity requirement of ¶ 2, the corresponding structure(s) of a means-plus-function limitation must be disclosed in the written description in such a manner that one skilled in the art will know and understand what structure corresponds to the means limitation.” Atmel Corp. v. Information Storage Device, Inc., 198 F.3d 1374, 1382 (Fed. Cir. 1999) (emphasis added). The proper inquiry “asks first whether structure is described in the specification, and if so, whether one skilled in the art would identify the structure from that description.” Id. at 1381 (emphasis in original).

Atmel Corp. v. Information Storage Devices Inc., 198 F.3d 1374, 53 USPQ2d 1225 (Fed. Cir. 1999) 2181

2447 Ex Parte Archer et al 12060508 - (D) MOHANTY obviousness-type double patenting 103 IBM (ROC-BKLS) c/o Kennedy Lenart Spraggins LLP JOSHI, SURAJ M

2493 Ex Parte Aviles et al 12015197 - (D) MORGAN 103 103 Mahamedi Paradice LLP (NetApp) SHAW, PETER C

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1619 Ex Parte Weber et al 11352600 - (D) FREDMAN 103 L'Oreal USA VENKAT, JYOTHSNA A

Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1715 Ex Parte Hicks et al 11833942 - (D) SMITH 103 Stolowitz Ford Cowger LLP LIGHTFOOT, ELENA TSOY

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2468 Ex Parte Chang et al 11751445 - (D) SILVERMAN 101 103 AT&T Legal Department - HFZ PHUNG, LUAT

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3634 Ex Parte Beachy 12774691 - (D) HOFFMANN 103 BELASCO, JACOBS & TOWNSLEY LLP CHIN-SHUE, ALVIN CONSTANTINE

schreiber, kloster, baxter travenol, continental can, therasense

custom search

REVERSED 
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2184 Ex Parte MacInnis et al 10763087 - (D) SHAW 103 Foley & Lardner LLP/ Broadcom Corporation HASSAN, AURANGZEB

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2439 Ex Parte Munsell et al 11828601 - (D) MacDONALD 102/103 THE DIRECTV GROUP, INC. TOLENTINO, RODERICK

2453 Ex Parte Miller 11865981 - (D) MOORE 102/103 IBM (ROC-BKLS) c/o Biggers Kennedy Lenart Spraggins LLP GEORGANDELLIS, ANDREW C

“To anticipate a claim, a prior art reference must disclose every limitation of the claimed invention, either explicitly or inherently.” In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d 1473, 1477 (Fed. Cir. 1997). “[A]bsence from the reference of any claimed element negates anticipation.” Kloster Speedsteel AB v. Crucible, Inc., 793 F.2d 1565, 1571 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Because the Examiner’s rejection is based on anticipation under 35 U.S.C. § 102—and not obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103—the Examiner may only use extrinsic evidence for the limited purpose of explaining what is inherent in the MPI-2 reference. See, e.g., In re Baxter Travenol Labs., 952 F.2d 388, 390 (Fed. Cir. 1991) (“Extrinsic evidence may be considered when it is used to explain, but not to expand, the meaning of a reference [relied upon to show anticipation].”) (emphasis added). ...

Where a “reference is silent about the asserted inherent characteristic, such gap in the reference may be filled with recourse to extrinsic evidence,” but “such evidence must make clear that the missing descriptive matter is necessarily present in the thing described in the reference, and that it would be so recognized by persons of ordinary skill . . . .” Continental Can Co. USA, Inc. v. Monsanto Co., 948 F.2d 1264, 1268 (Fed. Cir. 1991) (citations omitted, emphasis added).

Schreiber, In re, 128 F.3d 1473, 44 USPQ2d 1429 (Fed. Cir. 1997) 2111.02 , 2112 , 2114

Baxter Travenol Labs., In re, 952 F.2d 388, 21 USPQ2d 1281 (Fed. Cir. 1991) 2131.01 , 2145

Continental Can Co. v. Monsanto Co., 948 F.2d 1264, 20 USPQ2d 1746 (Fed. Cir. 1991) 2131.01

2476 Ex Parte Elston et al 11929995 - (D) COURTENAY 102/103 WHIRLPOOL CORPORATION - MD 3601 SLOMS, NICHOLAS

“Inherency, however, may not be established by probabilities or possibilities. The mere fact that a certain thing may result from a given set of circumstances is not sufficient.” Therasense, Inc. v. Becton, Dickinson & Co., 593 F.3d 1325, 1332 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (citing Cont'l Can Co. USA, Inc. v. Monsanto Co., 948 F.2d 1264, 1269 (Fed. Cir. 1991)).

Continental Can Co. v. Monsanto Co., 948 F.2d 1264, 20 USPQ2d 1746 (Fed. Cir. 1991) 2131.01

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3769 Ex Parte Tice 11172106 - (D) WIEKER 103 HONEYWELL/HUSCH SORIANO, BOBBY GILES

3788 Ex Parte Roberts 11601292 - (D) CALVE 103 Technology & Innovation Law Group, PC GRANO, ERNESTO ARTURIO

AFFIRMED-IN-PART 
Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2842 Ex Parte Gomm et al 11367914 - (D) DELMENDO 103 103 TRASK BRITT, P.C./ MICRON TECHNOLOGY O TOOLE, COLLEEN J

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3746 Ex Parte Garzaniti et al 12178759 - (D) HOELTER 103 102/103 TERUMO CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS CORPORATION KRAMER, DEVON C

AFFIRMED 
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1644 Ex Parte Watanabe et al 10568761 - (D) ADAMS 102/103 SUGHRUE MION, PLLC HADDAD, MAHER M

Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1782 Ex Parte Harris 12481670 - (D) HASTINGS 103 DICKINSON WRIGHT PLLC KASHNIKOW, ERIK

1785 Ex Parte Tran et al 11103827 - (D) PER CURIAM 103 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY HIGGINS, GERARD T

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2618 Ex Parte Andreasson 12167761 - (D) McCARTNEY 103 MYERS BIGEL SIBLEY & SAJOVEC, P.A. AMIN, JWALANT B

2689 Ex Parte Shaffer et al 11460456 - (D) DIXON 103 BROOKS KUSHMAN P.C./FGTL JIANG, YONG HANG

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2864 Ex Parte Tomlinson et al 12472650 - (D) HASTINGS 103 GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY HWANG, TIMOTHY

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3654 Ex Parte Clute et al 11713945 - (D) KINDER 112(2) 103 BGL/Autoliv ASP MANSEN, MICHAEL R

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3723 Ex Parte Storkel et al 10535436 - (D) GUIJT 102 THE PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY CHIN, RANDALL E

3738 Ex Parte Dugan et al 11325973 - (D) ADAMS 103 SQUIRE PATTON BOGGS (US) LLP STEWART, JASON-DENNIS NEILKEN

3745 Ex Parte Brown et al 12122869 - (D) STEPINA 102/103 CARLSON, GASKEY & OLDS/PRATT & WHITNEY EDGAR, RICHARD A