rembrandt

REVERSED
Tech Center 2600 Communications
2648 Ex Parte Chang et al 13466710 - (D) HAGY 102/103 41.50 112(2) KYOCERA INTERNATIONAL INC. CHAKRABORTY, RAJARSHI

Independent apparatus claim 1 recites active method steps (e.g., “a first base station transmitting . . .”) in connection with recited structural elements (“A cellular communication system comprising: . . .”). (App. Br. 16—17 (Claims App’x) (emphases added).) As such, this claim is effectively a hybrid apparatus/method claim, which the Federal Circuit has held is indefinite under § 112, second paragraph. See Rembrandt Data Techs., LP v. AOL, LLC, 641 F.3d 1331, 1339 (Fed. Cir. 2011) (holding apparatus claim reciting active transmitting step indefinite). This is a critical defect because it is unclear whether claim 1 covers a system that is merely capable of performing the recited function (e.g., “[/or] transmitting” certain information at some future time), or if that function actually must be performed (e.g., “transmitting” certain information actively at the current time).

2684 Ex Parte Krapf et al 13133849 - (D) EVANS 103 Maginot, Moore & Beck LLP BLACK-CHILDRESS, RAJSHEED O

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3744 Ex Parte MORI et al 12350441 - (D) O’HANLON 103 OBLON, MCCLELLAND, MAIER & NEUSTADT, L.L.P. RUSSELL, DEVON L

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1761 Ex Parte Zou 13406560 - (D) McMANUS 103 103 Carestream Health, Inc YOUNG, WILLIAM D

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2618 Ex Parte FRIEDLANDER et al 13648801 - (D) BAER 112(2)/102 102 41.50 101 Law Office of Jim Boice PRINGLE-PARKER, JASON A

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3624 Ex Parte Flinn et al 13269979 - (D) WIEDER 102 101 41.50 101 MANYWORLDS, INC. RINES, ROBERT D

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3781 Ex Parte Grimes et al 13325331 - (D) HORNER 103 103 FERRELLS, PLLC MATHEW, FENN C

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1656 Ex Parte TOVI et al 13850038 - (D) LaVIER 103 Wenderoth, Lind and Ponack LLP TSAY, MARSHA M

Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1793 Ex Parte Duan et al 13007866 - (D) SMITH 103 DAVIS, BROWN, KOEHN, SHORS & ROBERTS, P.C. TURNER, FELICIA C

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2194 Ex Parte Schofield et al 13453513 - (D) Per Curiam 103 Rolnik Law Firm, P.C. IBM Corp. (AUS/RCR) YUN, CARINA

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2435 Ex Parte Li et al 11173861 - (D) NAPPI 103 BANNER & WITCOFF, LTD GYORFI, THOMAS A

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2614 Ex Parte Li et al 13314265 - (D) EVANS 103 Zebra Technologies Corporation VALDEZ, PATRICK F

2649 Ex Parte Mu et al 12243232 - (D) BAIN 103 COATS & BENNETT, PLLC SHERIF, FATUMA G

2877 Ex Parte Crowther 12571836 - (D) DENNETT 103 BROOKS KUSHMAN P.C. BRYANT, REBECCA CAROLE

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3623 Ex Parte MacGregor et al 13316788 - (D) MEDLOCK 102/103 101 SEED INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW GROUP LLP ROSS, SCOTT M

3656 Ex Parte WATANABE et al 12908160 - (D) BROWNE 112(2)/102/103 112(1) NIXON & VANDERHYE, PC LUONG, VINH

3662 Ex Parte West et al 12240259 - (D) HOELTER 103 Harness Dickey & Pierce, P.L.C. (GM) SMITH, ISAAC G

katz interactive, IPXL, rembrandt

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2163 Ex Parte Gutjahr et al 12018514 - (D) CURCURI concurring JEFFERY 102 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY NGUYEN, KIM T

And to the extent that independent claim 10 improperly recites active method steps as part of an apparatus (i.e., "a first computer that provides ...." "a second computer  ... retrieves," " the second computer ... retrieves," "the second computer generates ...") to render the claim indefinite under 112(b) is likewise a question that the Examiner should consider following this opinion.  See In re Katz Interactive Call Proc. Pat. Litig., 639 F.3d 1303, 1318 (Fed. Cir. 2011)  (citing IPXL Holdings, L.L.C. v. Amazon.con, Inc. 430 F.3d 1377, 1384 (Fed. Cir. 2005)); see also Rembrandt Data Technologies, LP v. AOL, LLC, 641 F.3d 1331, 1339 (Fed. Cir 2011) (data transmitting device held indefinite for reciting transmitting method step). 

katz HARMON 5: 6, 7; MV5: 319; 6: 1-3, 13, 14; MV6: 191, 432
rembrandt MV5: 319; 6: 16; 9: 11, 22

IPXL Holdings v. Amazon.com, Inc., 430 F.2d 1377, 77 USPQ2d 1140 (Fed. Cir. 2005) 2173.05(p)

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2615 Ex Parte Setnes et al 12135946 - (D) SPAHN 112(2)/102/103 ZILKA-KOTAB, PC- IBM NEURAUTER, GEORGE C

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2497 Ex Parte Boss et al 11549728 - (D) MORGAN 102/103 102/103 IBM CORPORATION C/O DARCELL WALKER, ATTORNEY AT LAW HOLMES, ANGELA R

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2882 Ex Parte Van Kampen et al 12020811 - (D) KOKOSKI 102/103 103 CARLSON, GASKEY & OLDS, P.C. SANEI, MONA M

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2156 Ex Parte Harvey et al 11270795 - (D) KUMAR 103 Baker Botts LLP MITIKU, BERHANU

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2829 Ex Parte Hudgens 12283113 - (D) GARRIS 102/103 Ovonyx, Inc QUINTO, KEVIN V

2862 Ex Parte Popp 12152409 - (D) GAUDETTE 103 SMP Logic Systems NGHIEM, MICHAEL P

REHEARING

DENIED
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2193 Ex Parte Mourra 10906592 - (D) SMITH 103 CAREY, RODRIGUEZ, GREENBERG & O'KEEFE, LLP VU, TUAN A

IPXL, katz interactive, rembrandt, ekchian

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2156 Ex Parte Arends et al 11740355 - (D) ZECHER 103 IBM CORPORATION ROSTAMI, MOHAMMAD S

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2464 Ex Parte Moore et al 11517020 - (D) MORGAN 102/103 37 C.F.R. 41.50(b) 103 VERIZON GIDADO, RASHEED

2485 Ex Parte Fukuhara et al 10835582 - (D) JEFFERY 103 BIRCH STEWART KOLASCH & BIRCH, LLP LEE, Y YOUNG

2486 Ex Parte Jeon 10337611 - (D) WHITE 102/103 HARNESS, DICKEY & PIERCE, P.L.C. HALLENBECK-HUBER, JEREMIAH CHARLES

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2828 Ex Parte Sukhman et al 11021904 - (D) CLEMENTS 103 PERKINS COIE LLP - SEA General STAFFORD, PATRICK

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3683 Ex Parte Vu et al 10484498 - (D) PETRAVICK 103 37 C.F.R. 41.50(b) 102 ROTHWELL, FIGG, ERNST & MANBECK, P.C. MISIASZEK, MICHAEL

3686 Ex Parte Koster 10702253 - (D) MEDLOCK 103 ALSTON & BIRD LLP PHONGSVIRAJATI, POONSIN

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3716 Ex Parte Harris et al 11415881 - (D) KAUFFMAN 103 Lewis and Roca LLP - Sony D'AGOSTINO, PAUL ANTHONY

3767 Ex Parte Moberg et al 11224416 - (D) ADAMS 103 VIDAS, ARRETT & STEINKRAUS, P.A. HALL, DEANNA K

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2884 Ex Parte Kito et al 12179803 - (D) McKONE 102 102/103 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 112(2) SUGHRUE MION, PLLC BRYANT, MICHAEL C

A claim that recites a combination of two separate statutory classes of invention (under 35 U.S.C. § 101) “‘is not sufficiently precise to provide competitors with an accurate determination of the ‘metes and bounds’ of protection involved’ and is ‘ambiguous and properly rejected’ under section 112, paragraph 2.’” IPXL Holdings, L.L.C. v. Amazon.com, Inc., 430 F.3d 1377, 1384 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (quoting Ex parte Lyell, 17 USPQ2d 1548, 1550-51 (BPAI 1990)).

IPXL Holdings v. Amazon.com, Inc., 430 F.2d 1377, 77 USPQ2d 1140 (Fed. Cir. 2005) 2173.05(p)
...
We conclude that claim 17, although couched in terms of a conditional statement, is directed to the actions performed by the system, rather than the capabilities of the system. Thus, claim 17 recites both a statutory machine and a statutory process. See In re Katz Interactive Call Processing Patent Litig., 639 F.3d 1303, 1318 (Fed. Cir. 2011) (“Like the language used in the claim at issue in IPXL (‘wherein . . . the user uses’), the language used in Katz’s claims (‘wherein . . . callers digitally enter data’ and ‘wherein . . . callers provide . . . data’) is directed to user actions, not system capabilities.”); Rembrandt Data Techs., LP v. AOL, LLC, 641 F.3d 1331, 1339 (Fed. Cir. 2011) (data transmitting device held indefinite for reciting transmitting method step). Accordingly, claim 17 is indefinite. See IPXL, 430 F.3d at 1384.

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2162 Ex Parte Semerdzhiev et al 10856247 - (D) STEPHENS 103 BLAKELY SOKOLOFF TAYLOR & ZAFMAN SAP/BSTZ GOFMAN, ALEX N

2176 Ex Parte Mewherter et al 10685192 - (D) HOMERE 101/112(1)/103 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 101 CAREY, RODRIGUEZ, GREENBERG & O'KEEFE, LLP DEBROW, JAMES J

2179 Ex Parte Michelitsch et al 10726298 - (D) BENOIT 103 OBLON, SPIVAK, MCCLELLAND MAIER & NEUSTADT, L.L.P. LO, WEILUN

2194 Ex Parte Facemire et al 11268326 - (D) POTHIER 103 CAREY, RODRIGUEZ, GREENBERG & O'KEEFE, LLP JORDAN, KIMBERLY L

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2445 Ex Parte Shah 10670550 - (D) NEW 103 MHKKG/Oracle (Sun) JOO, JOSHUA

2445 Ex Parte Hind et al 10643601 - (D) PARVIS 103 CAREY, RODRIGUEZ, GREENBERG & O'KEEFE, LLP JOO, JOSHUA

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2637 Ex Parte Valley et al 11854449 - (D) BRANCH 103 THE DIRECTV GROUP, INC. LI, SHI K

2643 Ex Parte Nandagopal 11345695 - (D) CURCURI 103 ALCATEL-LUCENT USA INC. WALL & TONG, LLP D AGOSTA, STEPHEN M

2659 Ex Parte Beiermeister et al 11948480 - (D) HOMERE 103 General Motors Corporation c/o REISING ETHINGTON P.C. SHAH, PARAS D

2678 Ex Parte Vandenbrande et al 11421413 - (D) KRIVAK 103 YEE & ASSOCIATES, P.C. HOANG, PHI

2689 Ex Parte Huang 11607842 - (D) KRIVAK 112(2)/103 Paul M. Denk MORTELL, JOHN F

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2872 Ex Parte JENNINGS et al 11831830 - (D) DESHPANDE 102/103 PATTERSON & SHERIDAN, LLP - - APPM/TX WILKES, ZACHARY W

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3629 Ex Parte Nagda et al 10000121 - (D) MEDLOCK 103 TRIMBLE NAVIGATION LIMITED C/O WAGNER BLECHER CASLER, TRACI

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3717 Ex Parte Weil et al 10994505 - (D) TARTAL 103 Dority & Manning P.A. PINHEIRO, JASON PAUL  

REHEARING  

DENIED
Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2453 Ex Parte Achtermann et al 11456225 - (R) HOMERE 103 IBM CORP (YA) C/O YEE & ASSOCIATES PC ESKANDARNIA, ARVIN  

FEDERAL CIRCUIT  

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2856 2761 USHIP INTELLECTUAL PROPERTIES, LLC, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee, AND INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORPORATION, Third Party Defendant-Appellee. 2012-5077 5,831,220 08/845,012 6,105,014 09/162,874 MOORE summary judgment of noninfringement Cooper & Kirk, PLLC; Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice; Desmarais, LLP original DATTEN MUCHIN ZAVIS ROSENMAN GIBSON, RANDY W; COSIMANO, EDWARD R

Thus, statements giving rise to a disclaimer may be made in response to a rejection over the prior art, but they may also take place in other contexts. For example, an applicant’s remarks submitted with an Information Disclosure Statement can be the basis for limiting claim scope. See Ekchian v. Home Depot, Inc., 104 F.3d 1299, 1304 (Fed. Cir. 1997). We hold that a patent applicant’s response to a restriction requirement may be used to interpret patent claim terms or as a source of disclaimer.

rembrandt, tomlinson, wesslau

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1621 Ex Parte Strebelle et al 11722598 - (D) GRIMES 103 OBLON, SPIVAK, MCCLELLAND MAIER & NEUSTADT, L.L.P. VALENROD, YEVGENY

1649 Ex Parte Piliponsky et al 11875710 - (D) WALSH 102 BOZICEVIC, FIELD & FRANCIS LLP MACFARLANE, STACEY NEE

Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1733 Ex Parte Grohowski 11450059 - (D) COLAIANNI 102/103 Zitzmann Consulting, LLC ZHU, WEIPING

1754 Ex Parte Thiel 10841986 - (D) OWENS 102/103 PPG INDUSTRIES, INC. BAND, MICHAEL A

1792 Ex Parte van Krieken et al 10739036 - (D) GAUDETTE 103 FOLEY AND LARDNER LLP CHAWLA, JYOTI

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2425 Ex Parte Gupta et al 10954816 - (D) BENOIT 102/103 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY OKEKE, ONYEDIKA C

2439 Ex Parte Van Brabant 10748008 - (D) CHEN 112(2)/102/103 NOVAK DRUCE & QUIGG, LLP WANG, HARRIS C

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2699 Ex Parte Nurmi 11191152 - (D) FRAHM 103 Harrington & Smith, Attorneys At Law, LLC SHAPIRO, LEONID

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2835 Ex Parte Pai et al 11350276 - (D) KRIVAK 103 Ingrassia Fisher & Lorenz, P.C. (GD-AIS) PATEL, ISHWARBHAI B

2883 Ex Parte Farber et al 10398859 - (D) CURCURI 103 NIXON PEABODY, LLP RADKOWSKI, PETER

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3753 Ex Parte SUTLIFF et al 11278927 - (D) POWELL 103 WONG, CABELLO, LUTSCH, RUTHERFORD & BRUCCULERI, L.L.P. BASTIANELLI, JOHN

Tech Center 3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU)
1754 Ex parte BATTELLE MEMORIAL INSTITUTE, Patent Owner and Appellant 90011112 6,616,909 09/492,246 GUEST 103 BATTELLE MEMORIAL INSTITUTE JOHNSON, JERRY D original STRICKLAND, JONAS N

In re Wesslau, 353 F.2d 238, 241 (CCPA 1965) (“It is impermissible within the framework of section 103 to pick and choose from any one reference only so much of it as will support a given position, to the exclusion of other parts necessary to the full appreciation of what such reference fairly suggests to one of ordinary skill in the art.”).

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2857 Ex Parte Nanikashvili et al 90010751 7,542,878 12706541 LEBOVITZ 102/103 102/103 BRINKS HOFER GILSON & LIONE WEST, JEFFREY R

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3635 Ex Parte Smythe 11221386 - (D) VANOPHEM concurring-in-part HOELTER 103 obviousness-type double patenting Clifford Kraft PLUMMER, ELIZABETH A

3643 Ex Parte Krouse 11345070 - (D) HORNER 103 103 Faegre Baker Daniels LLP NGUYEN, SON T

3685 Ex Parte Andersson 11340890 - (D) FETTING 103 103 RENNER, OTTO, BOISSELLE & SKLAR, LLP HEWITT II, CALVIN L

3692 Ex Parte Vales 11045937 - (D) PETRAVICK 103 103 KING & SPALDING BAIRD, EDWARD J

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1611 Ex Parte Yang et al 11304976 - (D) BONILLA 103 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 103 Forest Laboratories, Inc. PURDY, KYLE A

1627 Ex Parte Breitenbach et al 11573327 - (D) McCOLLUM 103 Abel Law Group, LLP KAROL, JODY LYNN

1628 Ex Parte Chatlapalli et al 11478400 - (D) SNEDDEN 103 37 C.F.R § 41.50(b) 103 WYETH LLC SZNAIDMAN, MARCOS L

1651 Ex Parte Breton et al 11314043 - (D) BONILLA 103 K&L Gates LLP MARX, IRENE

As stated in Tomlinson, after finding admixing of the compounds to be obvious:

As to the introductory language, ‘a process of inhibiting degradation of polypropylene caused by exposure to light,’ again we do not think these words can serve to patentably distinguish the claimed process from the prior art. That language in effect, states the result of admixing the two materials. While the references do not show a specific recognition of that result, its discovery by appellants is tantamount only to finding a property in the old composition, not in the nickel compound for which, it is argued, a new use has been found.

In re Tomlinson, 363 F.2d 928, 934 (CCPA 1966).

Tomlinson, In re, 363 F.2d 928, 150 USPQ 623 (CCPA 1966) 2112.02

1653 Ex Parte Chaudhry 11435204 - (D) JENKS 112(1) Butzel Long DRISCOLL, LORA E BARNHART

Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1726 Ex Parte Jenninger et al 12569533 - (D) McKELVEY 103 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 103 NOVAK DRUCE CONNOLLY BOVE & QUIGG LLP GRESO, AARON J

1726 Ex Parte Yoo 11232872 - (D) COLAIANNI 103 H.C. PARK & ASSOCIATES, PLC LEE, CYNTHIA K

1729 Ex Parte Sennoun et al 10912298 - (D) OWENS 103 BrooksGroup CHUO, TONY SHENG HSIANG

1734 Ex Parte LaCourse et al 12419162 - (D) TIMM 103 ABEL LAW GROUP, LLP KOSLOW, CAROL M

1771 Ex Parte Chambard et al 10863041 - (D) GARRIS 103 Infineum USA L.P. VASISTH, VISHAL V

1778 Ex Parte Harnack et al 11563463 - (D) COLAIANNI 103 RANKIN, HILL & CLARK LLP KURTZ, BENJAMIN M

1791 Ex Parte Stokes et al 12051056 - (D) KIMLIN 103 NOVAK DRUCE CONNOLLY BOVE & QUIGG LLP STULII, VERA

1791 Ex Parte Stokes et al 11863823 - (D) KIMLIN 103 NOVAK DRUCE CONNOLLY BOVE & QUIGG LLP STULII, VERA

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2162 Ex Parte Dettinger et al 10897353 - (D) THOMAS 102/103 IBM GOFMAN, ALEX N

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2449 Ex Parte Werner 10767785 - (D) DROESCH 103 AT & T Legal Department - WS WON, MICHAEL YOUNG

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2641 Ex Parte Manchev 11306485 - (D) PER CURIAM 112(1)/102 PETER B. MANCHEV HOLLIDAY, JAIME MICHELE

2642 Ex Parte Han 11545239 - (D) COURTENAY 103 THE FARRELL LAW FIRM, P.C. VIANA DI PRISCO, GERMAN

2644 Ex Parte Kim et al 10845001 - (D) BUI 103 THE FARRELL LAW FIRM, P.C. EDOUARD, PATRICK NESTOR

2645 Ex Parte Anderson 10401517 - (D) MARTIN 103 HAMILTON, BROOK, SMITH & REYNOLDS, P.C. BRANDT, CHRISTOPHER M

2649 Ex Parte Karaoguz 10314292 - (D) KRIVAK 103 GARLICK & MARKISON DEAN, RAYMOND S

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2814 Ex Parte Lin et al 11174189 - (D) WHITEHEAD, JR. 112(2)/103 HAYNES AND BOONE, LLP CAO, PHAT X

2853 Ex Parte Perez et al 10513052 - (D) SMITH 103 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY SHAH, MANISH S

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3621 Ex Parte Chrosny et al 10996275 - (D) FETTING 101/102/103 PITNEY BOWES INC. POUNCIL, DARNELL A

In fact, these claims are ambiguous hybrid claims that the Examiner should review for definiteness. See Rembrandt Data Techs., LP v. AOL, LLC, 641 F.3d 1331, 1339 (Fed. Cir. 2011) (“reciting both an apparatus and a method of using that apparatus renders a claim indefinite under section 112, paragraph 2”) (internal citation and quotations omitted).

3665 Ex Parte Herzog et al 10908792 - (D) HORNER 103 HUSCH BLACKWELL LLP BROADHEAD, BRIAN J

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3724 Ex Parte Worrick 11602521 - (D) TARTAL 102/103 THE PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY CHOI, STEPHEN

3731 Ex Parte Avellanet et al 11452852 - (D) WALSH 103 JOHNSON & JOHNSON TANNER, JOCELIN C

3738 Ex Parte Bonitati et al 11859425 - (D) WALSH 103 BARNES & THORNBURG LLP HOBAN, MELISSA A

3772 Ex Parte Patel 12154789 - (D) McCARTHY 103 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 103 AMIT V. PATEL JACKSON, BRANDON LEE

3779 Ex Parte Schara et al 11083277 - (D) FREDMAN 103 ST. ONGE STEWARD JOHNSTON & REENS, LLC SMITH, PHILIP ROBERT

Tech Center 3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU)
1632 THE FOUNDATION FOR TAXPAYER & CONSUMER RIGHTS Requester and Appellant v. Patent of WISCONSIN ALUMNI RESEARCH FOUNDATION Patent Owner and Respondent 95000154 7029913 09/982,637 LEBOVITZ 102/103 Riverside Law LLP KUNZ, GARY L original WOITACH, JOSEPH T

2857 MEDICOMP, INC. Requester, Respondent, and Cross-Appellant v. Patent of CARD GUARD SCIENTIFIC, LTD. Patent Owner, Appellant, and Cross-Respondent 95001312 7,542,878 11/059,791 LEBOVITZ 102/103 37 C.F.R. § 41.77(b) 102/103 BRINKS HOFER GILSON & LIONE NGUYEN, LINH M original RAYMOND, EDWARD

REHEARING

DENIED
Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3692 Ex Parte Boni et al 11024146 - (D) FETTING 101 IP GROUP OF DLA PIPER LLP (US) EBERSMAN, BRUCE I

orthopedic, etter, rembrandt, invitrogen, ICON

REVERSED

1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1619 Ex Parte Tamura 10/540,816 GRIMES 103(a) HOWARD & HOWARD ATTORNEYS PLLC EXAMINER MATTISON, LORI K

1644 Ex Parte Plouet et al 10/530,893 SCHEINER 103(a) YOUNG & THOMPSON EXAMINER HADDAD, MAHER M

1657 Ex Parte Burkinshaw et al 11/181,677 WALSH 112(1)/103(a) O'KEEFE, EGAN, PETERMAN & ENDERS LLP EXAMINER SCHUBERG, LAURA J

“There is a distinction between trying to physically combine the two separate apparatus disclosed in two prior art references on the one hand, and on the other hand trying to learn enough from the disclosures of the two references to render obvious the claims in suit. . . . Claims may be obvious in view of a combination of references, even if the features of one reference cannot be substituted physically into the structure of the other reference. Orthopedic Equipment Co., Inc. v. U.S., 702 F.2d 1005, 1013 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (citation omitted); see also, In re Etter, 756 F.2d 852, 859-60 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (in banc) (“the criterion being not whether the references could be physically combined but whether the claimed inventions are rendered obvious by the teachings of the prior art as a whole”) (citations omitted).

Orthopedic Equip. Co., Inc. v. All Orthopedic Appliances, Inc., 707 F.2d 1376, 217 USPQ 1281 (Fed. Cir. 1983) . . . . 716.04
Etter, In re, 756 F.2d 852, 225 USPQ 1 (Fed. Cir. 1985) . . . . . . . . . 2242, 2258, 2279, 2286, 2642, 2686.04

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1724 Ex Parte Mayer et al 11/229,840 WARREN 103(a) NIXON & VANDERHYE, PC EXAMINER MCDONALD, RODNEY GLENN

1727 Ex Parte Hayashi et al 10/576,421 KRATZ 103(a) MCDERMOTT WILL & EMERY LLP EXAMINER ROE, CLAIRE LOUISE

1742 Ex Parte Meerman et al 10/500,713 KRATZ 112(1)/132 OLIFF & BERRIDGE, PLC EXAMINER WOLLSCHLAGER, JEFFREY MICHAEL

1761 Ex Parte Fernholz et al 11/257,874 HANLON 103(a) ECOLAB USA INC. EXAMINER DELCOTTO, GREGORY R

1782 Ex Parte Morris 11/098,228 NAGUMO 102(b)/103(a) E I DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY EXAMINER WOOD, ELLEN S

1784 Ex Parte Laird et al 11/898,557 WARREN 102(b) NIXON & VANDERHYE, PC EXAMINER XU, LING X

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2161 Ex Parte Cheshire et al 10/877,414 HUGHES 102(b) PVF -- APPLE INC. c/o PARK, VAUGHAN, FLEMING & DOWLER LLP EXAMINER NGUYEN, THU N

2600 Communications
2614 Ex Parte Sweeney et al 11/385,903 TURNER 102(b)/103(a) AT & T LEGAL DEPARTMENT - GB EXAMINER LE, KAREN L

2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2832 Ex Parte Bodlaender 10/502,153 WHITEHEAD, JR. 102(b)/37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 101 Philips Electornics North America Corporation EXAMINER UHLIR, CHRISTOPHER J

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3622 Ex Parte Mansfield Jr. 10/501,141 CRAWFORD 103(a) NEIFELD IP LAW, PC EXAMINER STAMBER, ERIC W

3674 Ex Parte Burdick et al 11/539,216 McCARTHY 103(a) REINHART BOERNER VAN DEUREN P.C. EXAMINER PATEL, VISHAL A

3689 Ex Parte Heimke et al 10/984,634 CRAWFORD 112(1)/103(a) Siemens Corporation EXAMINER ARAQUE JR, GERARDO

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3753 Ex Parte Hoang 10/908,165 McCARTHY 102(b) CONLEY ROSE, P.C. EXAMINER ROST, ANDREW J

3753 Ex Parte Palin et al 11/536,696 PATE III 103(a) Carlson, Gaskey, & Olds, P.C./Sikorsky EXAMINER BASTIANELLI, JOHN

3761 Ex Parte Bobroff et al 10/798,060 STAICOVICI 102(b)/103(a) HAEMONETICS CORPORATION EXAMINER HAND, MELANIE JO
AFFIRMED-IN-PART

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1775 Ex Parte Choo et al 11/449,745 WARREN 103(a) 103(a) BIRCH STEWART KOLASCH & BIRCH EXAMINER GRAHAM, CHANTEL LORAN

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2171 Ex Parte Levy 10/602,549 POTHIER 102(e) 102(e) 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 112(2) DIGIMARC CORPORATION EXAMINER NUNEZ, JORDANY

However, reciting both an apparatus and the method of using the apparatus renders a claim indefinite under § 112, second paragraph. See Rembrandt Data Tech., L.P. v. AOL, LLC, 641 F.3d 1331, 1339 (Fed. Cir. 2011).

2171 Ex Parte Lee et al 11/484,646 KRIVAK 102(b)/103(a) 103(a) SUGHRUE MION, PLLC EXAMINER SALOMON, PHENUEL S

2400 Networking, Mulitplexing, Cable, and Security
2457 Ex Parte Kasriel et al 10/128,598 RUGGIERO 102(e) 102(e) NORTH OAKS PATENT AGENCY EXAMINER NANO, SARGON N

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3694 Ex Parte Alkemper et al 11/096,406 CRAWFORD 101/102(b) GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY EXAMINER TROTTER, SCOTT S

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3765 Ex Parte Vattes et al 11/143,232 SPAHN 102(b)/103(a) 102(b)/103(a) LERNER, DAVID, LITTENBERG, KRUMHOLZ & MENTLIK EXAMINER MOHANDESI, JILA M
REEXAMINATION

EXAMINER AFFIRMED

3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU)
2662 Ex Parte 6985494 et al J2 GLOBAL COMMUNICATIONS, INC. Third Party Requestor, Respondent v. BEAR CREEK TECHNOLOGIES, INC. Patent Owner, Appellant 95/001,030 TURNER 102(b)/103(a) PATENT OWNER: MIELE LAW GROUP, PC THIRD PARTY REQUESTER: KENYON & KENYON LLP EXAMINER TIBBITS, PIA FLORENCE original EXAMINER MARCELO, MELVIN C

EXAMINER AFFIRMED

3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU)
2818 Ex Parte 6933608 et al Ex parte KAIJO CORPORATION Appellant 90/007,861, 90/008,629 and 90/010,340 BOALICK 305/112(1)/112(2)/102(b)/103(a) FOR PATENT OWNER: SNELL & WILMER, LLP FOR THIRD-PARTY REQUESTER: SoCAL IP LAW GROUP, LLP EXAMINER KIELIN, ERIK J original EXAMINER TRAN, MAI HUONG C

EXAMINER AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART

3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU)
3657 Ex Parte 7559414 B2 et al SHIMANO INC. Requester and Respondent v. SCRAM LLC. Patent Owner and Appellant 95/001,309 LEBOVITZ 102(b)/103(a) 103(a) Third Party Requester: DELAND LAW OFFICE Patent Owner: SWANSON & BRATSCHUN, L.L.C. EXAMINER GRAHAM, MATTHEW C original EXAMINER WILLIAMS, THOMAS J

The closest support we can find for Shimano’s position is the doctrine of “prosecution disclaimer” or “prosecution history estoppel” where statements made by a Patent Owner during prosecution of the patent can limit the scope of the claim, once issued in a patent. Invitrogen Corp. v. Clontech Laboratories Inc., 429 F3d 1052, 1078 (Fed. Cir. 2005). However, during reexamination, claims are given their broadest reasonable interpretation as they would be understood in the context of the specification. In re ICON Health & Fitness, Inc., 496 F.3d at 1379. The estoppel or disclaimer doctrine does not operate in the same way during reexamination proceedings.

Invitrogen Corp. v. Clontech Laboratories, Inc., 429 F.3d 1052, 77 USPQ2d 1161 (Fed. Cir. 2005) . . . . . . . 2138.04
AFFIRMED

1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1613 Ex Parte Panchev et al 10/496,322 GREEN 112(1)/103(a) Vladimir Panchev Marieta Pancheva Adelina Suvandjieva EXAMINER ARNOLD, ERNST V

1635 Ex Parte Roberts et al 09/972,245 SCHEINER 103(a) FOLEY AND LARDNER LLP EXAMINER SCHNIZER, RICHARD A

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1731 Ex Parte Cho et al 11/077,995 KRATZ 103(a) THORPE NORTH & WESTERN, LLP. EXAMINER PARVINI, PEGAH

1744 Ex Parte Monk et al 11/726,964 SMITH 102(b)/103(a) JON M. DICKINSON, P.C. EXAMINER LEE, EDMUND H

1765 Ex Parte Maziers 10/512,388 HANLON 103(a) FINA TECHNOLOGY INC EXAMINER LU, C CAIXIA

1774 Ex Parte Smith 11/495,406 SMITH 103(a) Bay Area Technolgy Law Group PC EXAMINER SORKIN, DAVID L

1786 Ex Parte Elschner et al 10/910,042 SMITH 102(b) CONNOLLY BOVE LODGE & HUTZ, LLP EXAMINER THOMPSON, CAMIE S

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2176 Ex Parte Hoover et al 10/155,723 DROESCH 103(a) HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY EXAMINER RIES, LAURIE ANNE

2600 Communications
2614 Ex Parte Melillo 10/836,814 MANTIS MERCADER 102(e)/103(a) Maginot, Moore & Beck LLP EXAMINER SAUNDERS JR, JOSEPH

2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2815 Ex Parte Lee 12/000,576 COURTENAY 103(a) HARNESS, DICKEY & PIERCE, P.L.C. EXAMINER WILSON, ALLAN R

2818 Ex Parte FUKURO et al 11/533,370 WHITEHEAD, JR. 102(e)/102(b) RABIN & Berdo, PC EXAMINER TAYLOR, EARL N

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3731 Ex Parte Gerberding 10/063,937 McCARTHY 103(a) VIDAS, ARRETT & STEINKRAUS, P.A. EXAMINER HOUSTON, ELIZABETH

3761 Ex Parte Steger et al 11/118,893 STAICOVICI 102(b)/103(a) THE PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY EXAMINER ZALUKAEVA, TATYANA