harza

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1724 Ex Parte Anastas et al 14041921 - (D) RANGE 103 APPLE INC./BROWNSTEIN c/o Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck, LLP SHEIKH, HAROON S

1793 Ex Parte Walton et al 14271223 - (D) SNAY 103 DYKEMA GOSSETT P.L.L.C. WONG, LESLIE A

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2621 Ex Parte Jayachandran et al 14069346 - (D) WINSOR 103 Guha Jayachandran FLORES, ROBERTO W

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2868 Ex Parte Ugawa 13907713 - (D) McMANUS 103 Keysight Technologies, Inc. ZAKARIA, AKM

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3646 Ex Parte OHSAKA 13914661 - (D) O'HANLON 103 BUCHANAN, INGERSOLL & ROONEY PC BURKE, SEAN P

The Examiner is correct to the extent that, in general, a mere duplication of parts does not evidence patentability without a showing of a new and unexpected result. See In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 671 (CCPA 1960) (holding that providing a plurality of ribs extending between a web and an adjacent concrete slab is obvious in view of a prior art reference showing one such rib). Here, however, the Examiner's modification is not a duplication of an existing part. Rather, it is a duplication and modification of an existing part, as the recited storage and inspection guide tubes are connected between different components.

Harza, In re, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960) 2144.04

3688 Ex Parte Karidi et al 12967394 - (D) REPKO 101 SHOOK, HARDY & BACON L.L.P. (MICROSOFT TECHNOLOGY LICENSING, LLC) VANDERHORST, MARIA VICTORIA

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3724 Ex Parte Larsson 12809635 - (D) STEPINA 103 SCA Hygiene Products AB c/o Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney, PC PETERSON, KENNETH E

3728 Ex Parte Longoni et al 12526307 - (D) LANEY 112(1)/112(2) 103 Steinfl + Bruno LLP PAGAN, JENINE MARIE

3731 Ex Parte Javois 11245421 - (D) STAICOVICI 103 Foley & Lardner LLP LYNCH, ROBERT A

3748 Ex Parte Geyer 13201113 - (D) JESCHKE 103 WRB-IP LLP AYALADELGADO,ANTHONY

3753 Ex Parte SCHWARZENBACHER et al 13849072 - (D) BROWN 103 Harness, Dickey & Pierce, P.L.C. (Lam) BARSS, KEVIN R

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1613 Ex Parte VISCOMI et al 13559013 - (D) GRIMES 102/103 102/103 41.50 102/103 Steinfl + Bruno LLP FUBARA, BLESSING M

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3693 Ex Parte Kinyua et al 13840560 - (D) CLEMENTS 101/103 101/103 Reed Smith LLP WARDEN, MICHAEL J

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1787 Ex Parte Bekele et al 12620071 - (D) SNAY 103 Alston & Bird/Sealed Air Corporation ENGLISH, PATRICK NOLAND

1791 Ex Parte Wolters et al 13503157 - (D) REN 103 Meunier Carlin & Curfman LLC JACOBSON, MICHELE LYNN

1793 Ex Parte Sakoda et al 14036213 - (D) SNAY 103 BGL/ Ann Arbor MOORE, WALTER A

1795 Ex Parte Iacopetti et al 14379344 - (D) RANGE 112(2) 103 LUCAS & MERCANTI, LLP FRIDAY, STEVEN A

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2445 Ex Parte Andersen 12702641 - (D) NAPPI 112(2) 103 Bank of America c/o Moore and Van Allen, PLLC JAKOVAC,RYANJ

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2619 Ex Parte SAOTOME 13945292 - (D) PYONIN 103 GREENBLUM & BERNSTEIN, P.L.C. LE, SARAH

2632 Ex Parte SAHOTA 14751018 - (D) KOHUT 103 Patterson & Sheridan, L.L.P. Qualcomm CADEAU, WEDNEL

2645 Ex Parte Bridge et al 14954759 - (D) JEFFERY 102 OTDP 41.50 103 Baker Botts L.L.P./Facebook Inc. MIZRAHI, DIANE D

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2862 Ex Parte Jiang et al 13354431 - (D) CASHION 101 GE Power & Water Fletcher Yoder PC NGHIEM, MICHAEL P

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3634 Ex Parte Taylor 14587269 - (D) HOFFMANN 103 Kaufhold Dix Patent Law KELLY, CATHERINE A

3643 Ex Parte ARA et al 14171084 - (D) KNIGHT 103 SUGHRUE MION, PLLC ALKER, KATHLEEN 1W ASAKI

3656 Ex Parte Uehara et al 12994052 - (D) LANEY 103 ALSTON & BIRD LLP MCGOVERN, BRIAN J

3671 Ex Parte Van Laecken 12948438 - (D) SONG 103 Kaufhold Dix Patent Law MISA, JOAN D

3679 Ex Parte Kury 13592417 - (D) ASTORINO 102/103 103 VOLPE AND KOENIG, P.C. LINFORD, JAMES ALBERT

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3714 Ex Parte Amaitis et al 14027955 - (D) MOHANTY 101/OTDP CANTOR FITZGERALD, L.P. COBURN, CORBETT B

3761 Ex Parte Bertrand et al 13276155 - (D) HOSKINS 103 DICKE, BILLIG & CZAJA, PLLC ATTN: MDT SURGICAL TECHNOLOGIES MATTERS ZIMBOUSKI, ARIANA

harza

custom search

REVERSED 
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2163 Ex Parte Backholm et al 11318487 - (D) McKONE 102 Perkins Coie LLP- NYC General NGUYEN, KIM T

2167 Ex Parte Auer et al 11045547 - (D) DESHPANDE 103 SAP AG c/o BUCKLEY, MASCHOFF & TALWALKAR LLC ARJOMANDI, NOOSHA

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2672 Ex Parte Wei 11267251 - (D) JENKS 103 PERKINS COIE LLP - SEA General GUILLERMETY, FRED

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3657 Ex Parte Lu et al 11206889 - (D) DeFRANCO 103 DICKINSON WRIGHT PLLC NGUYEN, XUAN LAN T

Moreover, the Examiner’s reliance on In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669 (CCPA 1960) for the principle that mere duplication of parts is within the level of ordinary skill in the relevant art, is inapplicable as Appellants have persuasively proffered a new and unexpected result for the claimed pin cluster arrangement that is not taught by APA or Dickerson, either alone or in combination.

Harza, In re, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960) 2144.04
DONNER 8: 864, 865

3657 Ex Parte Sato et al 11347258 - (D) BROWN 103 WENDEROTH, LIND & PONACK, L.L.P. IRVIN, THOMAS W

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3742 Ex Parte Linow et al 11291455 - (D) OSINSKI 102/103 PANITCH SCHWARZE BELISARIO & NADEL LLP CAMPBELL, THOR S

3776 Ex Parte Wagner et al 11784720 - (D) GERSTENBLITH 103 LAWRENCE R. OREMLAND, P.C. NELSON, MATTHEW M

AFFIRMED-IN-PART 
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2159 Ex Parte Chen et al 10626875 - (D) MacDONALD 103 101 XEROX - PARC / FAY SHARPE LLP BURKE, JEFF A

2166 Ex Parte Dharamshi et al 11590013 - (D) MANTIS MERCADER 102 102 BRAKE HUGHES BELLERMANN LLP C/O CPA Global HARPER, ELIYAH STONE

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2674 Ex Parte Woolfe et al 11762155 - (D) SCHEINER 103 103 GIBB & RILEY, LLC YANG, QIAN

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2835 Ex Parte Kells et al 11742592 - (D) RUGGIERO 112(2) 102/103 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY SMITH, COURTNEY L

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3611 Ex Parte Garfinkle 12035156 - (D) ASTORINO 103 103 Bay Area Technolgy Law Group PC DAVIS, CASSANDRA HOPE

3645 Ex Parte Jain et al 11750398 - (D) CALVE 103 102/103 CARLSON, GASKEY & OLDS/PRATT & WHITNEY c/o CPA Global BENEDIK, JUSTIN M

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3765 Ex Parte Kronenberger 11253037 - (D) JUNG 112(2)/103 112(2) WOOD, PHILLIPS, KATZ, CLARK & MORTIMER HADEN, SALLY CLINE

3781 Ex Parte Burns 11027258 - (D) GROSSMAN 103 102/103 37 C.F.R. § 41.50 103 Hartman Titus PLC MAI, TRI M

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1611 Ex Parte Arata 12340231 - (D) GRIMES 103 MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP FRAZIER, BARBARA S

1613 Ex Parte Bodmer et al 10356860 - (D) ADAMS 103/obviousness-type double patenting NOVARTIS PHARMACEUTICAL CORPORATION ARNOLD, ERNST V

Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1785 Ex Parte AOSHIMA et al 12038402 - (D) HANLON 102 GREENBLUM & BERNSTEIN, P.L.C. HIGGINS, GERARD T

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2100 Ex Parte Sanjar et al 11109069 - (D) HOFF 103 IBM CORPORATION (RHF) C/O ROBERT H. FRANTZ YIGDALL, MICHAEL J

2100 Ex Parte Wanigasekara-Mohotti et al 11371392 - (D) BUSCH 103 HICKMAN PALERMO TRUONG BECKER BINGHAM WONG LLP KIM, CHONG R

2113 Ex Parte Brundridge et al 11362977 - (D) MANTIS MERCADER 103 Baker Botts L.L.P. RIAD, AMINE

2179 Ex Parte Banatwala et al 10744302 - (D) Per Curiam 102/103 CAREY, RODRIGUEZ, GREENBERG & O'KEEFE, LLP THERIAULT, STEVEN B

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2434 Ex Parte DeYoung et al 11131641 - (D) KOHUT 103 ALIX, YALE & RISTAS, LLP LIPMAN, JACOB

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2451 Ex Parte Luciani et al 10729676 - (D) MANTIS MERCADER 102 102 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY WALSH, JOHN B

2481 Ex Parte Carton et al 11084268 - (D) MANTIS MERCADER 103 TellX, Inc. ADEGEYE, OLUWASEUN

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2645 Ex Parte Gidron et al 10573832 - (D) SMITH 102 ALCATEL-LUCENT USA INC. WALL & TONG, LLP CHOO, MUNSOON

2646 Ex Parte Palat et al 11618234 - (D) DANG 103 Williams, Morgan & Amerson, P.C. SAMS, MATTHEW C

2671 Ex Parte Pilu 10346357 - (D) BENOIT 101/112(2)/103 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY THOMAS, ASHISH

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3654 Ex Parte Hofmann 11623242 - (D) MARTIN 103 VIDAS, ARRETT & STEINKRAUS, P.A. KRUER, STEFAN

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3746 Ex Parte Biester 10564584 - (D) CAPP 112(2)/103 FLETCHER YODER (CAMERON INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION) STIMPERT, PHILIP EARL

3788 Ex Parte Fregonese et al 10477538 - (D) SAINDON 103 NORRIS MCLAUGHLIN & MARCUS PA PICKETT, JOHN G

REHEARING

DENIED
Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3767 Ex Parte Vaillancourft et al 12321900 - (D) MILLS Carella, Byrne, Bain, Gilfillan, Cecchi, Stewart & Olstein PATEL, SHEFALI DILIP

REEXAMINATION

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3651 Ex parte CRANE MERCHANDISING SYSTEMS, INC. 90009374 90010114 6230930 6324120 08/949,366 09/779,296 MARTIN 103 DOCKET CLERK THIRD-PARTY REQUESTERS: Baker Botts LLP SandenVendo America, Inc. Bryan Cave LLP Royal Vendors, Inc. JASTRZAB, JEFFREY R original NOLAND, KENNETH W

GRANTED
Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2818 Ex parte RAMBUS, INC. Appellant 90011005 6324120 EASTHOM 103 FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, GARRETT & DUNNER LLP THIRD PARTY REQUESTER: Townsend & Townsend & Crew, LLP ESCALANTE, OVIDIO original NGUYEN, TAN

DENIED
2831 KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS ELECTRONICS, N.V. Requester, Appellant, and Respondent v. HUBBELL INCORPORATED Patent Owner, Appellant, and Respondent 95000124 6838618 10/702,725 BLANKENSHIP 112(1)/112(2) ROYLANCE ABRAMS BERDO & GOODMAN LLP Third Party Requester: MCANDREWS, HELD & MALLOY, LTD RUBIN, MARGARET R original ESTRADA, ANGEL R

harza, e-pass, curry, mathias

REVERSED

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1783 Ex Parte Krebs et al 10/845,068 COLAIANNI 103(a) WILSONART INTERNATIONAL, INC. C/O WELSH & FLAXMAN, LLC EXAMINER SAMPLE, DAVID R

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2158 Ex Parte Vera 11/244,946 BLANKENSHIP 103(a) Kunzler Needham Massey & Thorpe EXAMINER WU, YICUN

2161 Ex Parte McAllister et al 10/943,054 JEFFERY 102(b)/103(a) CAREY, RODRIGUEZ, GREENBERG & PAUL, LLP STEVEN M. GREENBERG EXAMINER BIBBEE, JARED M

2400 Networking, Mulitplexing, Cable, and Security
2464 Ex Parte Boer et al 10/672,657 KRIVAK 101/103(a) RYAN, MASON & LEWIS, LLP EXAMINER SINKANTARAKORN, PAWARIS

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3721 Ex Parte Scirica 11/580,592 ASTORINO 102(b) Tyco Healthcare Group LP d/b/a Covidien EXAMINER LOW, LINDSAY M
AFFIRMED-IN-PART

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1786 Ex Parte Balthes et al 10/287,250 COLAIANNI 102(b)/103(a) BARNES & THORNBURG EXAMINER CHOI, PETER Y

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2158 Ex Parte Boccasam et al 11/244,060 FISCHETTI 102(b)/102(e)/103(a) Steven P. Arnheim Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP EXAMINER WU, YICUN

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3635 Ex Parte Rippolone 10/787,429 ASTORINO 102(b)/103(a) CARLSON, GASKEY & OLDS, P.C. EXAMINER GILBERT, WILLIAM V

The Examiner relies on In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669 (CCPA 1960) to provide reason why one of ordinary skill in the art would have modified Bortugno’s system to duplicate parts. (Id.). The Examiner does not analogize the facts in Harza to the facts in this appeal.

The Appellant contends the “reasoning for duplication of parts does not apply.” (App. Br. 7). In Harza, the court held that “[i]t is well settled that the mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance.” Harza , 274 F.2d at 671 (italics added). The Appellant points out that the three gutter sections recited in claims 7 and 8 “are different and not duplicates.” (Id.).
...

These modifications are far beyond the holding in Harza, which is limited to a mere duplication of parts.

Harza, In re, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2144.04
3685 Ex Parte Cihula 10/746,077 CRAWFORD 103(a) LAWRENCE CHO ATTORNEY AT LAW C/O CPA GLOBAL EXAMINER WINTER, JOHN M

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3762 Ex Parte Kast et al 10/836,127 O’NEILL 102(b)/103(a) IPLM GROUP, P.A. EXAMINER KAHELIN, MICHAEL WILLIAM
AFFIRMED

1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1641 Ex Parte Letant et al 11/140,391 MILLS 102(b)/102(e)/103(a) Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC LAWRENCE LIVERMORE NATIONAL LABORATORY EXAMINER
LAM, ANN Y

1745 Ex Parte Stull et al 11/157,004 WARREN 103(a) Integrated Turf Solutions, LLC EXAMINER TOLIN, MICHAEL A

1767 Ex Parte Good et al 10/968,658 COLAIANNI 103(a) HENKEL CORPORATION EXAMINER EASHOO, MARK

1716 Ex Parte Mikhaylichenko et al 10/816,487 COLAIANNI nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting/103(a) MARTINE PENILLA & GENCARELLA, LLP EXAMINER MACARTHUR, SYLVIA

1796 Ex Parte Adkins et al 10/687,156 WARREN 102(b)/103(a) BAYER MATERIAL SCIENCE LLC EXAMINER SERGENT, RABON A

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2175 Ex Parte Lin et al 11/398,138 DANG 102(e)/103(a) ROGITZ & ASSOCIATES EXAMINER PHANTANA ANGKOOL, DAVID

2600 Communications
2618 Ex Parte Zafar et al 10/717,242 KOHUT 102(e) Delphi Technologies, Inc. EXAMINER GESESSE, TILAHUN

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3611 Ex Parte Bowers et al 10/365,088 GAY ANN SPAHN 102(b)/103(a) WM. CATES RAMBO EXAMINER SILBERMANN, JOANNE

3621 Ex parte MILLER 10/192,185 PETRAVICK 103(a) Edwin H. Taylor BLAKELY, SOKOLOFF, TAYLOR & ZAFMAN LLP EXAMINER AUGUSTIN, EVENS J

Limitations appearing in the specification but not recited in the claim are not read into the claim. E-Pass Techs., Inc. v. 3Com Corp., 343 F.3d 1364, 1369 (Fed. Cir. 2003) (citation omitted) (claims must be interpreted “in view of the specification” without importing limitations from the specification into the claims unnecessarily) (“The problem is to interpret claims ‘in view of the specification’ without unnecessarily importing limitations from the specification into the claims.”). We decline to read the three criteria argued by the Appellant into the claims.

E-Pass Techs., Inc. v. 3Com Corp., 343 F.3d 1364, 67 USPQ2d 1947 (Fed. Cir. 2003).. . . . . . . . .2106, 2111.01

See Ex parte Curry, 84 USPQ2d 1272, 1275 (BPAI 2005) (informative) (“Common situations involving nonfunctional descriptive material are: - a computer-readable storage medium that differs from the prior art solely with respect to nonfunctional descriptive material, such as music or a literary work, encoded on the medium, - a computer that differs from the prior art solely with respect to nonfunctional descriptive material that cannot alter how the machine functions (i.e., the descriptive material does not reconfigure the computer), or - a process that differs from the prior art only with respect to nonfunctional descriptive material that cannot alter how the process steps are to be performed to achieve the utility of the invention. Thus, if the prior art suggests storing a song on a disk, merely choosing a particular song to store on the disk would be presumed to be well within the level of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made. The difference between the prior art and the claimed invention is simply a rearrangement of nonfunctional descriptive material.).” See also Ex parte Mathias, 84 USPQ2d 1276 (BPAI 2005) (informative).
3633 Ex Parte Broad et al 10/871,401 McCARTHY 102(b)/103(a) DOBRUSIN & THENNISCH PC EXAMINER FIGUEROA, ADRIANA

3686 Ex Parte Bocionek et al 10/337,132 FISCHETTI 103(a) Alexander J. Burke Siemens Corporation EXAMINER LE, LINH GIANG

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3761 Ex Parte Zander et al 10/749,871 GREENHUT 103(a) 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 103(a) KIMBERLY-CLARK WORLDWIDE, INC. Tara Pohlkotte EXAMINER HAND, MELANIE JO
REHEARING

DENIED

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3633 Ex Parte Sullivan et al 11/517,723 McCARTHY 102(b) Bay Area Technology Law Group PC EXAMINER BUCKLE JR, JAMES J

DENIED

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3667 Ex Parte Choban et al 10/130,463 CRAWFORD 103(a) David C Jenkins Eckert Seamans Cherrin & Mellott EXAMINER CHEUNG, MARY DA ZHI WANG

NEW

REVERSED

3781 Ex Parte Borowski et al 11/039,426 STAICOVICI 103(a) DYKEMA GOSSETT PLLC EXAMINER SMALLEY, JAMES N

1785 Ex Parte Burch et al 11/796,639 COLAIANNI 102(b)/103(a) HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY EXAMINER SHEWAREGED, BETELHEM

1777 Ex Parte Kraft 11/873,117 NAGUMO 103(a)/obviousness-type double patenting MCDERMOTT WILL & EMERY LLP EXAMINER MENON, KRISHNAN S

AFFIRMED-IN-PART

2612 Ex Parte Batra et al 11/423,411 DROESCH 103(a) Zilka-Kotab, PC EXAMINER LU, SHIRLEY

AFFIRMED

1777 Ex Parte Apffel 11/580,857 COLAIANNI 103(a) Agilent Technologies, Inc. in care of: CPA Global EXAMINER XU, XIAOYUN

1613 Ex Parte Bernstein 10/813,760 WALSH 103(a) BARNES & THORNBURG LLP EXAMINER KWON, BRIAN YONG S

1731 Ex Parte Braganca et al 10/518,443 WARREN 103(a) BIRCH STEWART KOLASCH & BIRCH EXAMINER MCDONOUGH, JAMES E

3628 Ex Parte Ogg 10/677,829 LORIN 103(a) FULBRIGHT & JAWORSKI L.L.P EXAMINER VETTER, DANIEL

REHEARING

3654 Ex Parte Meckler 10/794,872 O’NEILL HAHN LOESER / LINCOLN EXAMINER HAUGLAND, SCOTT J

st. regis, harza, ochiai, dillon

REVERSED

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1733 Ex Parte Ohki 10/897,016 GARRIS 103(a) MCDERMOTT WILL & EMERY LLP EXAMINER ROE, JESSEE RANDALL

1735 Ex Parte Wilks 11/357,458 HASTINGS 102(b)/103(a) NASA GODDARD SPACE FLIGHT CENTER EXAMINER PATEL, DEVANG R

1793 Ex Parte Hu et al 10/801,424 PAK 103(a) W.R. GRACE & CO.-CONN. EXAMINER BRUNSMAN, DAVID M

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2165 Ex Parte Soylemez et al 10/841,941 SIU 102(b)/103(a) HICKMAN PALERMO TRUONG & BECKER/ORACLE EXAMINER PULLIAM, CHRISTYANN R
2400 Networking, Mulitplexing, Cable, and Security
2491 Ex Parte Kleinsteiber et al 10/062,125 SIU 112(2)/102(b)/103(a) Brocade-Wong Cabello Lutsch Rutherford EXAMINER HENNING, MATTHEW T

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3679 Ex Parte Mahy et al 11/065,369 O’NEILL 103(a) OBLON, SPIVAK, MCCLELLAND MAIER & NEUSTADT, L.L.P. EXAMINER KENNEDY, JOSHUA T

Appellants also contend that the Examiner’s reliance on the case law of St. Regis Paper Company v. Bemis Company, Inc., 549 F.2d 833 (7th Cir. 1977) and In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669 (CCPA 1960), to duplicate parts so that the proposed modification includes a plurality of arms, does not consider the facts of either St. Regis or Harza and amounts to the use of an improper per se rule of obviousness. ... Nor does the case law of either St. Regis or Harza, relied upon by the Examiner, demonstrate per se obviousness for duplicating the single bendable member taught by Schwarzschild to arrive at the claimed invention. See In re Ochiai, 71 F.3d 1565, 1570 (Fed. Cir. 1995) (no per se rule of obviousness exists).

Harza, In re, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2144.04

Ochiai, In re, 71 F.3d 1565, 37 USPQ2d 1127 (Fed. Cir. 1995) . . . . . . . . 706.02(n), 2116.01
REEXAMINATION

EXAMINER AFFIRMED

3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU)
2871 Ex parte LG DISPLAY CO., LTD. 90/008,146 6,373,537 SIU 102(b)/103(a)/obviousness-type double patenting Patent Owner: McKenna Long & Aldridge LLC Third Party Requesters: Bruce K. Lagerman, Lagerman and Associates, PLLC EXAMINER CHOI, WOO H original EXAMINER TON, MINH TOAN T

EXAMINER AFFIRMED

3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU)
2871 Ex parte LG DISPLAY CO., LTD. 90/008,150 6,020,942 SIU 103(a)/obviousness-type double patenting PATENT OWNER MCKENNA LONG & ALDRIDGE LLP THIRD PARTY REQUESTER BRUCE K. LAGERMAN LAGERMAN AND ASSOCIATES, PLLC EXAMINER CHOI, WOO H original EXAMINER TON, MINH TOAN T

AFFIRMED

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1727 Ex Parte Horpel et al 11/578,664 GARRIS 103(a) OBLON, SPIVAK, MCCLELLAND MAIER & NEUSTADT, L.L.P. EXAMINER ARCIERO, ADAM A

1767 Ex Parte Neal et al 11/401,510 HASTINGS 103(a) BAYER MATERIAL SCIENCE LLC EXAMINER RIOJA, MELISSA A

While we agree that the problem faced by an applicant is a relevant factor, a teaching or suggestion of applicant's problem is not always required for a prima facie case of obviousness. An invention may be obvious for reasons the inventor did not contemplate. See In re Dillon, 919 F.2d 688, 693 (Fed. Cir. 1990)(en banc).

Dillon, In re, 919 F.2d 688, 16 USPQ2d 1897 (Fed. Cir. 1990) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2141, 2144, 2144.09, 2145
1787 Ex Parte Schaepkens et al 10/779,373 OWENS 103(a) DUANE MORRIS LLP - DC EXAMINER KRUER, KEVIN R
2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2174 Ex Parte Anspach et al 11/135,460 COURTENAY 102(b) HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY EXAMINER KUMAR, ANIL N

2174 Ex Parte Ferrarini et al 10/948,703 SIU 102(b)/103(a) FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, GARRETT & DUNNER LLP EXAMINER KUMAR, ANIL N

gurley, para-ordnance, harza, freeman,

REVERSED 

2100 Computer Architecture and Software 

Ex Parte Koh et al 09/802,857 THOMAS 103(a)/112(2) 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) RADER FISHMAN & GRAUER PLLC EXAMINER YIGDALL, MICHAEL J 

AFFIRMED-IN-PART 

1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry 

Ex Parte Guglielmotti et al 10/560,836 WALSH 103(a) OBLON, SPIVAK, MCCLELLAND MAIER & NEUSTADT, L.L.P. EXAMINER RAMACHANDRAN, UMAMAHESWARI Ex Parte Shy 11/123,360 WALSH 103(a) STINSON MORRISON HECKER LLP 

See Gurley, 27 F.3d at 553; see also, Para-Ordnance Manufacturing v. SGS Importers International Inc., 73 F.3d 1085, 1090 (Fed Cir. 1995) (a warning against use of an element, rather than omission of mention of the element, is required to find teaching away). 

Gurley, In re, 27 F.3d 551, 31 USPQ2d 1130 (Fed. Cir. 1994). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2123, 2145 

2100 Computer Architecture and Software 

Ex Parte Forman et al 10/835,684 HOMERE 101/103(a) HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY EXAMINER SULLIVAN, DANIELLE D 

Ex Parte Nutter et al 10/145,374 FETTING 102(e)/103(a) LAW OFFICE OF DALE B. HALLING EXAMINER LE, MIRANDA 

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review 

Ex Parte Sharp 09/765,985 LORIN 103(a) 37 C.F.R. 41.50(b) KLARQUIST SPARKMAN, LLP EXAMINER MITTAL, KRISHAN K 

Cf. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 774 (CCPA 1960) ("It is well settled that the mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced".) 

Harza, In re, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2144.04 

REEXAMINATION 

3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU) 

Ex parte PBI PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS, INC. 90/008,132 6,624,096 DELMENDO 103(a) FOR PATENT OWNER: HAMMER & ASSOCIATES, P.C., FOR THIRD-PARTY REQUESTER: MICHAEL F. SNYDER VOLPE AND KOENIG, P.C. EXAMINER TURNER, SHARON L 

Collateral estoppel (also called issue preclusion) “precludes relitigation in a second suit of issues actually litigated and determined in the first suit.” In re Freeman, 30 F.3d 1459, 1465 (Fed. Cir. 1994). This doctrine applies only if: “(1) the issue is identical to one decided in the first action; (2) the issue was actually litigated in the first action; (3) resolution of the issue was essential to a final judgment in the first action; and (4) plaintiff had a full and fair opportunity to litigate the issue in the first action.” Id. 

Freeman, In re, 30 F.3d 1459, 31 USPQ2d 1444 (Fed. Cir. 1994). . . 706.03(w), 2250, 2666.01