impax, gleave, novo

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2175 Ex Parte Johnston 12020308 - (D) NAPPI 102/103 Shook, Hardy & Bacon L.L.P. Adobe Systems Incorporated HO, RUAY L

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2484 Ex Parte Reynolds et al 13020073 - (D) COURTENAY 102 ERICSSON INC. CHEVALIER, ROBERT

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2612 Ex Parte IMAI et al 12973635 - (D) WHITEHEAD, JR. 102 NIXON & VANDERHYE, P.C. POINTE, WHITNEY A

2646 Ex Parte Jubin et al 12459317 - (D) DILLON 103 Docket Clerk - SAMS RAMPURIA, SHARAD K

2686 Ex Parte Toledo et al 12554114 - (D) STRAUSS 103/double patenting MACMILLAN, SOBANSKI & TODD, LLC - FORD LU, SHIRLEY

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2834 Ex Parte Booth 13008093 - (D) TROCK 103 SIEMENS CORPORATION LE, DANG D

3623 Ex Parte Deshpande et al 11938061 - (D) SHAH 103 The Brevetto Law Group, PLLC GURSKI, AMANDA KAREN

3687 Ex Parte Foll 11664941 - (D) HUTCHINS 103 Squire PB (NVA/DC Office) AN, IG TAI

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
1627 Ex Parte Alberts 13019005 - (D) JENKS 103 103 MARVIN A. GLAZER SOROUSH, LAYLA

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2128 Ex Parte Kopelman 12451896 - (D) SHIANG 103 103/double patenting WSGR / Align Technology , Inc. ALHIJA, SAIF A

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2443 Ex Parte McConnell et al 12576652 - (D) FINK 102/103 102/103 SPRINT SHIN, KYUNG H

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2646 Ex Parte Wisherd et al 11696744 - (D) EVANS 103 double patenting Zebra/Alston & Bird OBAYANJU, OMONIYI

3687 Ex Parte Guzzo et al 12985779 - (D) CRAWFORD 103 103 41.50 112(2) GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY LUDWIG, PETER L

3735 Ex Parte Kaiser 12510370 - (D) PER CURIAM 102 102/103 Medtronic, Inc. (CRDM) WESTON, TIFFANY C

"The enablement requirement for prior art to anticipate under section 102 does not require utility, unlike the enablement requirement for patents under section 112." Impax Labs., Inc. v. Aventis Pharms. Inc., 468 F.3d 1366, 1381 (Fed. Cir. 2006). see also In re Gleave, 560 F.3d 1331 (Fed. Cir. 2009) and Novo Nordisk Pharms., Inc. v. Bio-Tech. Gen. Corp., 424 F.3d 1347 (Fed. Cir. 2005)

Impax Labs. Inc. v. Aventis Pharm. Inc., 468 F.3d 1366, 81 USPQ2d 1001 (Fed Cir. 2006) 2121 , 2122 , 2152.02(b)

Gleave, In re, 560 F.3d 1331, 90 USPQ2d 1235 (Fed. Cir. 2009) 2152.02(b)

AFFIRMED
1628 Ex Parte PERSHADSINGH 12916337 - (D) GRIMES 103 Acuity Law Group, P.C. SZNAIDMAN, MARCOS L

1735 Ex Parte Buxbaum 10784055 - (D) BEST 103 Blue Filament Law WARTALOWICZ, PAUL A

1741 Ex Parte Jaeckel et al 12349242 - (D) BEST 103 LERNER GREENBERG STEMER LLP SNELTING, ERIN LYNN

1741 Ex Parte Calais et al 12526341 - (D) SQUIRE 103 ARKEMA INC. CALANDRA, ANTHONY J

1779 Ex Parte VELU et al 12633825 - (D) SMITH 103 E I DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY FORTUNA, ANA M

1793 Ex Parte Arenz et al 11659902 - (D) HASTINGS 103 HARNESS, DICKEY & PIERCE, P.L.C. MUKHOPADHYAY, BHASKAR

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2116 Ex Parte McCollom 12505142 - (D) LENTIVECH 103 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY CHANG, ERIC

2166 Ex Parte Eyres et al 12576959 - (D) HAMANN 103 Kunzler Law Group/ARC HARPER, ELIYAH STONE

2192 Ex Parte Huin et al 12906851 - (D) JURGOVAN 112(2)/102/103 Sunstein Kann Murphy & Timbers LLP LEE, MARINA

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2434 Ex Parte Krysiak et al 12995731 - (D) COURTENAY 103 Workman Nydegger BAYOU, YONAS A

2435 Ex Parte Francfort et al 12224799 - (D) FENICK 102 KNOBBE MARTENS OLSON & BEAR LLP DADA, BEEMNET W

2461 Ex Parte DeCusatis et al 12050503 - (D) KUMAR 103 CANTOR COLBURN LLP-IBM POUGHKEEPSIE MIAN, OMER S

2484 Ex Parte Jagmag 12539337 - (D) MORGAN 103 Foley & Lardner LLP/ Broadcom Corporation CHOWDHURY, NIGAR

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2661 Ex Parte Cooper 11514075 - (D) WHITEHEAD, JR. 102/103 Stevens Law Group MONK, MARK T

2662 Ex Parte Gao et al 13125968 - (D) ENGELS 103 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY COLEMAN, STEPHEN P

2665 Ex Parte McAllister et al 12900362 - (D) DANG 102/103 Artegis Law Group, LLP/NVIDIA GILLIARD, DELOMIA L

3676 Ex Parte OMALLEY et al 12758414 - (D) BAHR 103 CANTOR COLBURN LLP- BAKER HUGHES INCORPORATED HARCOURT, BRAD

3763 Ex Parte Robinson et al 12230777 - (D) SCHOPFER 102/103 LAW OFFICE OF LOUIS WOO MEHTA, BHISMA

REHEARING

GRANTED
3766 Ex Parte Rise et al 12425758 - (D) PER CURIAM 103 SHUMAKER & SIEFFERT , P.A WU, TONG E

DENIED
1628 Ex Parte Bernstein 13247125 - (D) PAULRAJ 103 Barnes & Thornburg LLP (CH) PAGONAKIS, ANNA

1766 Ex Parte Robinson et al 12600295 - (D) McKELVEY 103 THE LUBRIZOL CORPORATION WASHVILLE, JEFFREY D

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2142 Ex Parte Choudhary et al 12177691 - (D) HUME 103 CRGO LAW PAN, PHOEBE X

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2883 Ex Parte Zukauskas et al 12401043 - (D) ANKENBRAND 112(1)/112(2) LaBatt, LLC (SET) HOLLWEG, THOMAS A

REEXAMINATION

AFFIRMED
3742 AMERICAN HEAT MANUFACTURER, LLC Requester, Cross-Appellant, Respondent v. ECOSMART US LLC Patent Owner, Appellant Ex Parte 7,945,146 et al 12/136,034 95001823 - (D) SONG 102 McNeely, Hare & War, LLP Requester, Cross-Appellant, Respondent Daniel S. Polley, P.A. ENGLE, PATRICIA LYNN original ROBINSON, DANIEL LEON

novo, Impax, hiniker

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1732 Ex Parte Sang et al 10589199 - (D) FRANKLIN 103 CROWELL & MORING LLP SAHA, BIJAY S

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3737 Ex Parte Yun 11672571 - (D) ADAMS 103 102/103/obviousness-type double patenting Andrews Kurth LLP SANTOS RODRIGUEZ, JOSEPH M

3745 Ex Parte Suciu et al 11965883 - (D) JESCHKE 103 112(1) CARLSON, GASKEY & OLDS/PRATT & WHITNEY BROWN, ADAM WAYNE

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1765 Ex Parte Henning et al 12571493 - (D) ABRAHAM 102/103 FROMMER LAWRENCE & HAUG ZIMMER, MARC S

1765 Ex Parte Smith et al 12380892 - (D) HASTINGS 102/103 Bausch & Lomb Incorporated SALAMON, PETER A

“In order to anticipate, a prior art disclosure must also be enabling, such that one of ordinary skill in the art could practice the invention without undue experimentation. The standard for enablement of a prior art reference for purposes of anticipation under section 102 differs from the enablement standard under 35 U.S.C. § 112.” Novo Nordisk Pharms., Inc. v. Bio-Tech. Gen. Corp., 424 F.3d 1347, 1355 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (internal citations omitted). While section 112 states that the specification must enable one skilled in the art to ‘use’ the invention, “section 102 makes no such requirement as to an anticipatory disclosure . . . . Rather, anticipation only requires that those suggestions be enabled to one of skill in the art.” “Whether a prior art reference is enabling is a question of law based upon [the] underlying factual findings.” Id (internal citations omitted.)

It has also been held that “proof of efficacy is not required for a prior art reference to be enabling for purposes of anticipation.” Impax Labs. Inc. v. Aventis Pharms. Inc., 468 F.3d 1366, 1383 (Fed. Cir. 2006). “Rather, the proper issue is whether the . . . patent is enabling in the sense that it describes the claimed invention sufficiently to enable a person of ordinary skill in the art to carry out the invention.” Id. at 1383.

Impax Labs. Inc. v. Aventis Pharm. Inc., 468 F.3d 1366, 1383, 81 USPQ2d 1001, 1013 (Fed Cir. 2006) 2121 , 2122 , 2152.02(b)

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2128 Ex Parte Kano et al 11881479 - (D) BOUCHER 102/103 Anne Vachon Dougherty CALLE, ANGEL J

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2663 Ex Parte Hunt et al 12138917 - (D) BEAMER 103 COATS & BENNETT/SONY ERICSSON QUIETT, CARRAMAH J

2666 Ex Parte Hohmann et al 10490453 - (D) FRAHM 103 ROTHWELL, FIGG, ERNST & MANBECK, P.C. LEFKOWITZ, SUMATI

See In re Hiniker Co., 150 F.3d 1362, 1369 (Fed. Cir. 1998) (“[The] proffered facts . . . are not commensurate with the claim scope and are therefore unpersuasive.”). Claim 1 does not contain limitations requiring the reduction of wiring between the display and display controller on a smart card. In fact, claim 1 does not recite any wiring at all.

Hiniker Co., In re, 150 F.3d 1362, 47 USPQ2d 1523 (Fed. Cir. 1998) 2103 , 2242 , 2258 , 2258.01 , 2642

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2872 Ex Parte Kulas 12580236 - (D) GARRIS 102 CHARLES J. KULAS MAI, HUY KIM