koito

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1612 Ex Parte Atanasoska et al 11094638 - (D) McCOLLUM 103 VIDAS, ARRETT & STEINKRAUS, P.A. HOLLOMAN, NANNETTE

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2194 Ex Parte Dunshea et al 11422656 - (D) SHIANG 102 IBM AUSTIN IPLAW (DG) C/O DELIZIO GILLIAM, PLLC MUDRICK, TIMOTHY A

2683 Ex Parte Ghabra 12478931 - (D) HUGHES 103 BROOKS KUSHMAN P.C. / LEAR CORPORATION YANG, JAMES J

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2813 Ex Parte IWABUCHI et al 12829114 - (D) KRATZ 103 RADER FISHMAN & GRAUER PLLC LUKE, DANIEL M

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3624 Ex Parte Sitarski 11975820 - (D) MEDLOCK 103 KRAGULJAC LAW GROUP, LLC / ORACLE KONERU, SUJAY

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3618 Ex Parte Major et al 11930342 - (D) JESCHKE 103 103 MacMillan, Sobanski & Todd, LLC - GM EBNER, KATY MEYER

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3763 Ex Parte Hartmann et al 11903363 - (D) FREDMAN 112(1) 103/101 37 C.F.R. § 41.50 (b) 101 McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP Medela, Inc. WILSON, LARRY ROSS

“Because the amended material is inherently contained in the original application, it cannot constitute new matter.” Koito Mfg. Co., Ltd. v. Turn-Key-Tech, LLC, 381 F.3d 1142, 1154 (Fed. Cir. 2004).

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1747 Ex Parte Georges et al 12339585 - (D) PAK 103 THE GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY DYE, ROBERT C

1767 Ex Parte Page 12444150 - (D) McKELVEY 103 POLYONE CORPORATION SCOTT, ANGELA C

1778 Ex Parte Hawkins et al 12277643 - (D) DELMENDO 103 Foley & Lardner LLP FITZSIMMONS, ALLISON G

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2111 Ex Parte Pawlowski 12350136 - (D) JURGOVAN 102/103 FLETCHER YODER (MICRON TECHNOLOGY, INC.) DANG, KHANH

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2436 Ex Parte Bertin 12089607 - (D) HUME 103 YOUNG & THOMPSON MCNALLY, MICHAEL S

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2652 Ex Parte HORODEZKY et al 11610307 - (D) SCHOPFER 102/103 QUALCOMM INCORPORATED POPE, KHARYE

2687 Ex Parte Cornwall et al 11828710 - (D) MEYER 103 Hanley, Flight & Zimmerman, LLC (Itron) MURPHY, JEROLD B

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3628 Ex Parte Mateer 12397822 - (D) MEDLOCK 103 FOLEY & LARDNER LLP CAMPBELL, SHANNON S

3681 Ex Parte Besson 12237654 - (D) BAYAT 112(2)/103 WILLIAM H. EILBERG KUCAB, JAMIE R

beattie, perreira, genentech2, koito

custom search

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3733 Ex Parte Senn et al 11221648 - (D) FREDMAN 102/103 102/103 Fay Kaplun & Marcin, LLP COTRONEO, STEVEN J

3775 Ex Parte Richelsoph et al 10730210 - (D) BONILLA 102/103 obviousness-type double patenting RATNERPRESTIA NELSON, CHRISTINE L

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1616 Ex Parte SenGupta et al 11345064 - (D) WALSH 103 MARSHALL, GERSTEIN & BORUN LLP KARPINSKI, LUKE E

1627 Ex Parte Harbige et al 10756761 - (D) JENKS 103 BROWN RUDNICK LLP KANTAMNENI, SHOBHA

“An expert opinion is no better than the soundness of the reasons supporting it.” Perreira v. Secretary of the Dept. of HHS, 33 F.3d 1375, 1377 (Fed. Cir. 1994); In re Beattie, 974 F.2d 1309, 1313 (Fed. Cir. 1992) (opinion evidence in declarations has little value without factual support).

Beattie, In re, 974 F.2d 1309, 24 USPQ2d 1040 (Fed. Cir. 1992) 716.01(c), 2145

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2829 Ex Parte Peidous 11781664 - (D) WHITEHEAD, JR. 102 FARJAMI & FARJAMI LLP SENGDARA, VONGSAVANH

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3641 Ex Parte Aylor 11706676 - (D) RICE 112(1)/102/103 ROBERT B. AYLOR ABDOSH, SAMIR

“Section 112 requires that the patent specification enable ‘those skilled in the art to make and use the full scope of the claimed invention without ‘undue experimentation”’ in order to extract meaningful disclosure of the invention and, by this disclosure, advance the technical arts. Koito Mfg. Co., Ltd. v. Turn-Key-Tech, LLC, 381 F.3d 1142, 1155 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (quoting Genentech, Inc. v. Novo Nordisk A/S, 108 F.3d 1361, 1365 (Fed.Cir.1997) (citation omitted)).

Genentech, Inc. v. Novo Nordisk A/S, 108 F.3d 1361, 42 USPQ2d 1001 (Fed. Cir. 1997) 2161.01