angstadt, atlas powder2, falkner, vaeck, masham

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1622 Ex Parte Machhammer et al 10815873 - (D) PRATS 112(1) OBLON, SPIVAK, MCCLELLAND MAIER & NEUSTADT, L.L.P. OH, TAYLOR V

Accordingly, it is “well settled that patent applicants are not required to disclose every species encompassed by their claims, even in an unpredictable art.” In re Vaeck, 947 F.2d 488, 496 (Fed. Cir. 1991).

For example, in Falkner v. Inglis, the court affirmed the conclusion of the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences that claims to a modified pox virus vaccine were enabled, despite the fact that the specification focused on viruses other than pox virus, provided no examples directed to pox virus, and discussed pox virus only in general terms relating to the inventive disclosure. Falkner v. Inglis, 448 F.3d 1357, 1365 (Fed. Cir. 2006).

Vaeck, In re, 947 F.2d 448, 20 USPQ2d 1438 (Fed. Cir. 1991) 2107.01, 2144.08, 2164.01, 2164.01(c), 2164.03, 2164.06(b), 2164.08

Falkner v. Inglis, 448 F.3d 1357, 79 USPQ2d 1001 (Fed. Cir. 2006) 2163

However, it is well settled that a claim does not lack enablement merely because it encompasses inoperative embodiments. See Atlas Powder Co. v. E.I. du Pont De Nemours & Co., 750 F.2d 1569, 1576 (Fed. Cir. 1984); see also In re Angstadt, 537 F.2d 498 (CCPA 1976).

Atlas Powder Co. v. E.I. duPont de Nemours & Co., 750 F.2d 1569, 224 USPQ 409 (Fed. Cir. 1984) 2111.03, 2164.01, 2164.08(b)

Angstadt, In re, 537 F.2d 498, 190 USPQ 214 (CCPA 1976) 2164.01, 2164.06, 2164.08(b)

1646 Ex Parte Chen et al 10723955 - (D) McCOLLUM 101/112(1) Arena Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Bozicevic, Field & Francis LLP LI, RUIXIANG

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2672 Ex Parte Patton et al 10845438 - (D) MacDONALD 102 Gerald W. Maliszewski BECKLEY, JONATHAN R

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3623 Ex Parte Godwin et al 11302759 - (D) MEDLOCK 103 DOCKET CLERK JACKSON, ERNEST ADEYEMI

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2476 Ex Parte Belanger et al 11789584 - (D) MacDONALD 103 AT&T Legal Department - SZ ABELSON, RONALD B

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2813 Ex Parte Matocha 11295915 - (D) McKEOWN 103 GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY LUKE, DANIEL M

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3736 Ex Parte Foerster et al 10734671 - (D) JENKS 102 WELSH FLAXMAN & GITLER LLC HOEKSTRA, JEFFREY GERBEN

A “recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus” if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987).

Masham, Ex parte, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987) 2114

falkner, lizardtech, seid

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1636 Ex Parte FISHER et al 09293670 - (D) PRATS 112(1)/103 Rigel Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Bozicevic, Field & Francis LLP WESSENDORF, TERESA D

As the Federal Circuit has noted:

A claim will not be invalidated on section 112 grounds simply because the embodiments of the specification do not contain examples explicitly covering the full scope of the claim language. That is because the patent specification is written for a person of skill in the art, and such a person comes to the patent with the knowledge of what has come before. Placed in that context, it is unnecessary to spell out every detail of the invention in the specification; only enough must be included to convince a person of skill in the art that the inventor possessed the invention and to enable such a person to make and use the invention without undue experimentation.

Falkner v. Inglis, 448 F.3d 1357, 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2006) (quoting LizardTech, Inc. v. Earth Resource Mapping, PTY, Inc., 424 F.3d 1336, 1345 (Fed.Cir.2005)).

LizardTech, Inc. v. Earth Resource Mapping, Inc., 424 F.3d 1336, 76 USPQ2d 1724 (Fed. Cir. 2005) 2161.01, 2163

Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1775 Ex Parte Stewart et al 11784719 - (D) OBERMANN 103 USDA, ARS, OTT BOWERS, NATHAN ANDREW

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2424 Ex Parte Knutson et al 10084773 - (D) BAUMEISTER 103 THOMSON MULTIMEDIA LICENSING INC. SHEPARD, JUSTIN E

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3721 Ex Parte Fuchs et al 11188545 - (D) ASTORINO 112(1)/103 STRIKER, STRIKER & STENBY LOW, LINDSAY M

3761 Ex Parte Carlucci et al 10239599 - (D) ASTORINO 102/103 THE PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY KIDWELL, MICHELE M

3767 Ex Parte Ghannoum et al 10641947 - (D) REIMERS Concurring McCARTHY 112(2) ALCON GRAY, PHILLIP A

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1725 Ex Parte Brandon 12123513 - (D) BEST 103 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 112(2) EVEREADY BATTERY COMPANY INC DOUYETTE, KENNETH J

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2451 Ex Parte Damm et al 10303882 - (D) WARD 103 103 Kramer & Amado, P.C. PATEL, DHAIRYA A

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3651 Ex Parte Sherman et al 11216531 - (D) MORRISON 103 103 DORITY & MANNING, P.A. KUMAR, RAKESH

As to the “ornamental shape”, it has long been held that features that relate to “ornamentation only and have no mechanical function whatsoever” cannot be relied upon for patentability of a claim in a utility patent application. In re Seid, 161 F.2d 229, 231 (CCPA 1947).

Seid, In re, 161 F.2d 229, 73 USPQ 431 (CCPA 1947) 2144.04

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1721 Ex Parte Yoo 11344630 - (D) NAGUMO 103 DUANE MORRIS LLP (TSMC) RUGGLES, JOHN S

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2158 Ex Parte Thomsen 11314709 - (D) HUGHES 101/102 SAP AG c/o BUCKLEY, MASCHOFF & TALWALKAR LLC HOCKER, JOHN P

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2823 Ex Parte Akram et al 11384069 - (D) ARPIN 103 TRASK BRITT, P.C./ MICRON TECHNOLOGY STARK, JARRETT J

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3617 Ex Parte Fielden 11104231 - (D) PER CURIAM 103 Clifford Kraft BELLINGER, JASON R

3634 Ex Parte Newman 11096784 - (D) OSINSKI 103 Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP PUROL, DAVID M

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3725 Ex Parte Waggoner et al 11291069 - (D) POWELL 103 DINSMORE & SHOHL LLP LEWIS, JUSTIN V
 
REHEARING  

DENIED
Tech Center 3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU)
2743 Ex parte RONALD A. KATZ TECHNOLOGY LICENSING L.P. Appellant 90010044 90008229 90/010,130 5974120 08/480,185 CHEN 102 COOLEY LLP KIELIN, ERIK J original WOO, STELLA L

DENIED
Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3686 Ex Parte Hatlestad et al 10787045 - (R) TURNER 102/103 SCHWEGMAN, LUNDBERG & WOESSNER, P.A. RANGREJ, SHEETAL