REVERSED
Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2453 Ex Parte Poikselka 10880982 - (D) CRAWFORD 103 Ditthavong & Steiner, P.C. VOSTAL, ONDREJ C
Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3624 Ex Parte Epstien et al 10429230 - (D) FETTING 103 Edell Shapiro & Finnan LLC PATS, JUSTIN
3638 Ex Parte Behrens et al 12083167 - (D) GREENHUT 103 Cozen O'Connor BUCKLE JR, JAMES J
Thus, on the record before us, it appears that the Examiner drew upon hindsight knowledge of
the claimed invention, and “use[d] the invention as a template for its own reconstruction—an illogical and inappropriate process by which to determine patentability.” Sensonics, Inc. v. Aerosonic Corp., 81 F.3d 1566, 1570 (Fed. Cir. 1996)(citations omitted). Accordingly, we must reverse the Examiner’s rejections.
REMANDED
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2164 Ex Parte Karpf et al 11645067 - (D) PER CURIAM 102(e) DICKSTEIN SHAPIRO LLP KUDDUS, DANIEL A
AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3671 Ex Parte Simmons et al 11522395 - (D) GREENHUT 103 103 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 103 BUCHANAN, INGERSOLL & ROONEY PC RISIC, ABIGAIL ANNE
Patent specifications are written for those skilled in the art and, therefore, need not teach or point out in detail that which is wellknown in the art. In re Myers, 410 F.2d 420, 424 (CCPA 1969). In fact, the omission of that which is well-known is preferred. MPEP § 2164.08. Our inquiry under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) takes into account the fact that that which is old, well-known, or obvious is often left unstated. See In re Jacoby, 309 F.2d 513, 516 (CCPA 1962) (an artisan must be presumed to know something about the art apart from what the references disclose). For these reasons, it has been held that reliance on a large number of references in a rejection does not, without more, weigh against the obviousness of the claimed invention. In re Gorman, 933 F.2d 982, 986 (Fed. Cir. 1991).
Gorman, In re, 933 F.2d 982, 18 USPQ2d 1885 (Fed. Cir. 1991) 707.07(f) , 2145
AFFIRMED
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2182 Ex Parte Dieffenderfer 11627705 - (D) HOMERE 103 QUALCOMM INCORPORATED BERNARD, DANIEL J
2184 Ex Parte Roy 12031412 - (D) KOHUT 102/103 Oblon, Spivak/Broadcom Corporation MAMO, ELIAS
Tech Center 2600 Communications
2646 Ex Parte Bhakta et al 11613214 - (D) BUI 103 IBM CORPORATION SHAHEED, KHALID W
Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2885 Ex Parte Dassanayake et al 13172435 - (D) HASTINGS 103 HARNESS, DICKEY & PIERCE, P.L.C. NEILS, PEGGY A
Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3628 Ex Parte Edgett et al 10843790 - (D) WORTH 102(e)/103 IPASS INC. (DeLizio Gilliam) C/O DELIZIO GILLIAM, PLLC HAYES, JOHN W
3682 Ex Parte Nicholas et al 11134116 - (D) FETTING 101/103 CARDINAL LAW GROUP DURAN, ARTHUR D
