Nystrom, Phillips, sunrace

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1632 Ex Parte Yamanaka et al 12379564 - (D) NEW 112(1) Foley & Lardner LLP CROUCH, DEBORAH

1636 Ex Parte Oliphant et al 13689206 - (D) ADAMS 103 Mintz Levin-Roche/ Ariosa HAMMELL, NEIL P

1653 Ex Parte Morris 13439192 - (D) McCOLLUM 103 BOZICEVIC, FIELD & FRANCIS LLP MACAULEY, SHERIDAN R

1662 Ex Parte Fogher et al 12377085 - (D) SCHNEIDER 103 NIXON & VANDERHYE, PC WORLEY, CATHY KINGDON

Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1798 Ex Parte Ogle et al 12561102 - (D) HASTINGS 102/103 BOYLE FREDRICKSON S.C WISCONSIN ALUMNI RESEARCH FOUNDATION KWAK, DEAN P

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2144 Ex Parte Freisthler et al 13104154 - (D) COURTENAY 102/103 DINSMORE & SHOHL LLP JUNG, SEUNG WOON

 "When different words or phrases are used in separate claims, a difference in meaning is presumed." Nystrom v. TREX Co., Inc., 424 F.3d 1136, 1143 (Fed. Cir. 2005). Under the doctrine of claim differentiation, "the presence of a dependent claim that adds a particular limitation gives rise to a presumption that the limitation in question is not present in the independent claim." Phillips v. AWH Corp, 415 F.3d 1303, 1315 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (en banc). This presumption is "especially strong when the limitation in dispute is the only meaningful difference between an independent and dependent claim, and one party is urging that the limitation in the dependent claim should be read into the independent claim." SunRace Roots Enterprise Co., Ltd. v. SRAM Corp., 336 F.3d 1298, 1303 (Fed. Cir. 2003).

Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303, 75 USPQ2d 1321 (Fed. Cir. 2005) 2111 , 2111.01 , 2143.01 , 2258

Sunrace Roots Enter. Co. v. SRAM Corp., 336 F.3d 1298, 67 USPQ2d 1438 (Fed. Cir. 2003) 2111.01

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2411 Ex Parte Baldemair et al 13514063 - (D) MOORE 103 41.50 103 COATS & BENNETT, PLLC GANGULY, SUMITRA

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2881 Ex Parte Bateman et al 12514972 - (D) TIMM 103 Waters Technologies Corporation MCCORMACK, JASON L

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3623 Ex Parte AHERN et al 13471867 - (D) LORIN 103 41.50 101 Roberts Mlotkowski Safran Cole & Calderon, P,C, SWARTZ, STEPHENS

3627 Ex Parte Matsumoto 11272334 - (D) KOHUT dissenting COURTENAY III 103 Condo Roccia Koptiw LLP HAIDER, FAWAAD

3663 Ex Parte Logan et al 12418907 - (D) REIMERS 103 REISING ETHINGTON P.C. General Motors Corporation MUSTAFA, IMRAN K

3695 Ex Parte Mast 12774787 - (D) FETTING 101/112(2)/103 DARCELL WALKER, ATTORNEY AT LAW IBM CORPORATION LIU, CHIA-YI

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3742 Ex Parte BUCCELLA 12482017 - (D) STAICOVICI 103 STITES & HARBISON PLLC JENNISON, BRIAN W

3743 Ex Parte Kowald et al 13208918 - (D) SCHOPPER 103 Bell Nunnally & Martin LLP LAU, JASON

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3629 Ex Parte Shaouy et al 12886200 - (D) BAYAT 103 103 YEE AND ASSOCIATES, P.C. WHITAKER, ANDREW B

3645 Ex Parte Maissant et al 12189147 - (D) BAHR 103 103 WestemGeco L.L.C. LOBO, IAN J

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3742 Ex Parte Hensel 13306897 - (D) BROWNE 103 103 41.50 112(2)/103 MOLINS & CO. PTY. LTD. HOANG, TUBA

3763 Ex Parte Roualdes 12858109 - (D) JESCHKE 103 112(2) POLSINELLI PC SHAH, NIYATI DILIP

3772 Ex Parte DiEdwardo 13278336 - (D) JESCHKE 103 112(1)/112(2)/103 JACQUELINE TADROS, PA HARRIS, RAYMOND EUGENE

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1611 Ex Parte Easson et al 13383061 - (D) McCOLLUM 103 MILLEN, WHITE, ZELANO & BRANIGAN, P,C PURDY, KYLE A

1619 Ex Parte Qiu et al 13847112 - (D) TOWNSEND 103 ALCON RESEARCH, LTD, ALAWADI, SARAH

1619 Ex Parte Qiu et al 13847164 - (D) MILLS 103 ALCON RESEARCH, LTD, ALAWADI, SARAH

1647 Ex Parte LAL et al 14177534 - (D) MILLS 101/112(1)/102/103 Foley & Lardner LLP SAOUD, CHRISTINE J

Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1714 Ex Parte Rosenbauer 12863997 - (D) WILSON 103 BSH Home Appliances Corporation COLEMAN, RYAN L

1747 Ex Parte Crooks et al 13398449 - (D) OWENS 103 WOMBLE CARLYLE SANDRIDGE & RICE, LLP YAARY, ERIC

1763 Ex Parte TIERNEY et al 13585526 - (D) KRATZ 103 MILLEN, WHITE, ZELANO & BRANIGAN, P,C AHVAZI, BIJAN

1773 Ex Parte CHEWTER et al 13727801 - (D) KRATZ 103 SHELL OIL COMPANY MCCULLOUGH, ERIC J.

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2166 Ex Parte Parthasarathy et al 13155271 - (D) JIVANI 102/103 STERNE, KESSLER, GOLDSTEIN & FOX PLLC LIN, SHEW FEN

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2421 Ex Parte Walston 12993511 - (D) SILVERMAN 102/103 ARRIS Enterprises, LLC SALCE, JASON P

2426 Ex Parte Morzos 12618019 - (D) ENGLE 112(1)/103 Seed IP Law Group LLP/EchoStar (290110) HUYNH, AN SON PHI

2485 Ex Parte Schneider et al 13105065 - (D) DROESCH 103 Weaver Austin Villeneuve & Sampson LLP - QUAL GEROLEO, FRANCIS

2491 Ex Parte ETCHEGOYEN et al 13734175 - (D) GALLIGAN 103 Uniloc USA Inc. LAGOR, ALEXANDER

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2632 Ex Parte Hara et al 11697053 - (D) MacDONALD 103 OBLON, MCCLELLAND, MAIER & NEUSTADT, LLP, BURD, KEVIN MICHAEL

2651 Ex Parte Gant 12694009 - (D) DEJMEK 103 HP Inc. BLAIR, KILE O

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2838 Ex Parte Pons 13383941 - (D) JURGOVAN 103 COATS & BENNETT, PLLC AHMAD, SHAHZEB K

2854 Ex Parte Helmstadter et al 11867359 - (D) GAUDETTE 103 LERNER GREENBERG STEMER LLP MARINI, MATTHEW G

2884 Ex Parte Song et al 11702794 - (D) GARRIS 103 THE SMALL PATENT LAW GROUP LLC HO, ALLEN C

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3662 Ex Parte Phillips et al 13157533 - (D) O'HANLON 103 BROOKS KUSHMAN P,CJFG1L SMITH, ISAAC G

3667 Ex Parte HJELM et al 13090554 - (D) KINDER double patenting 102 Clairvolex Inc, ALSOMIRI, MAID! A

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3711 Ex Parte Jones 13673448 - (D) STAICOVICI 101 41.50 101 DICKINSON WRIGHT PLLC LAYNO, BENJAMIN

3731 Ex Parte Farnan 12794847 - (D) PESLAK 103 WOOD, HERRON & EV ANS, LLP DANG, ANH TIEU

3754 Ex Parte Bryant 11553088 - (D) KINDER 112(1)/103 LARSON AND LARSON NGUYEN, TUAN N

3765 Ex Parte Takata 11792718 - (D) JESCHKE 112(2) 103 KRATZ, QUINTOS & HANSON, LLP HADEN, SALLY CLINE

REHEARING

DENIED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1633 Ex Parte Tardi et al 13122454 - (D) SMITH double patenting MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP POPA, ILEANA

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2113 Ex Parte Harrison et al 13547674 - (R) JlVANI 103 CRGO LAW MASKULINSKI, MICHAEL C

Phillips, sunrace

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2482 Ex Parte Ju 12652747 - (D) CHEN 103 NORTH AMERICA INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CORPORATION FINDLEY, CHRISTOPHER G

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2668 Ex Parte McAuley et al 12546948 - (D) SZPONDOWSKI 102/103 FAY SHARPE / XEROX - ROCHESTER CESE, KENNY A

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3744 Ex Parte Major et al 12032816 - (D) WIEKER 103 MacMillan, Sobanski & Todd, LLC - GM TANENBAUM, TZVI SAMUEL

3779 Ex Parte Kammer et al 12258192 - (D) HORNER 103 ECOLAB USA INC. NEAL, TIMOTHY JAY

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3626 Ex Parte Li et al 12430348 - (D) MEYERS 103 103 TUTUNJIAN & BITETTO, P.C. CHNG, JOY POH AI

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1616 Ex Parte Iwanaga et al 10581285 - (D) PER CURIAM 103 Birch, Stewart, Kolasch & Birch, LLP KARPINSKI, LUKE E

1618 Ex Parte KAESEMEYER 13048736 - (D) ADAMS 102/103 PEPPER HAMILTON LLP ROGERS, JAMES WILLIAM

1644 Ex Parte Smith et al 12415585 - (D) SMITH 103 STETINA BRUNDA GARRED & BRUCKER SZPERKA, MICHAEL EDWARD

Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1746 Ex Parte Chapman et al 13624711 - (D) BEST 103 YEE & ASSOCIATES, P.C. GROSS, CARSON

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2122 Ex Parte Partridge 12622857 - (D) PINKERTON 103 PARK, VAUGHAN, FLEMING & DOWLER LLP RIFKIN, BEN M

2176 Ex Parte BYRNE et al 12825253 - (D) PINKERTON 103 PATTERSON & SHERIDAN, LLP/IBM SVL JOSEPH, SHAWN S

2183 Ex Parte Torvalds et al 12720621 - (D) HOWARD 102 MURABITO, HAO & BARNES LLP GEIB, BENJAMIN P

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2455 Ex Parte FERRAGUT et al 12556617 - (D) DANG 103 WHIRLPOOL CORPORATION - MD 3601 KIM, EDWARD J

2461 Ex Parte Melpignano et al 12347852 - (D) HUME 103 SEED INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW (EP ORIGINATING) MIAN, OMER S

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2688 Ex Parte Pezeshk et al 12414263 - (D) HUME 102 GE Licensing ALUNKAL, THOMAS D

Under the doctrine of claim differentiation, "the presence of a dependent claim that adds a particular limitation gives rise to a presumption that the limitation in question is not present in the independent claim." Phillips v. AWH Corp, 415 F.3d 1303, 1315 (Fed. Cir. 2005). This presumption is "especially strong when the limitation in dispute is the only meaningful difference between an independent and dependent claim, and one party is urging that the limitation in the dependent claim should be read into the independent claim." SunRace Roots Enterprise co., Ltd. v. SRAM Corp., 336 F.3d 1298, 1303 (Fed. Cir. 2003).

Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303, 75 USPQ2d 1321 (Fed. Cir. 2005) 2111 , 2111.01 , 2143.01 , 2258

Sunrace Roots Enter. Co. v. SRAM Corp., 336 F.3d 1298, 67 USPQ2d 1438 (Fed. Cir. 2003) 2111.01

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2848 Ex Parte Delgado et al 12002616 - (D) HASTINGS 103 GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY SINCLAIR, DAVID M

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3777 Ex Parte Zhou et al 12712444 - (D) BAHR 103 SCHIFF HARDIN, LLP REMALY, MARK DONALD

keller, datamize, musgrave, Nystrom, Phillips, sunrace

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2155 Ex Parte Baluja et al 11173702 - (D) FRAHM 103 FISH & RICHARDSON P.C. HOFFLER, RAHEEM

2182 Ex Parte Brenner et al 11751277 - (D) CHEN 103 IBM CORPORATION (MH) c/o MITCH HARRIS, ATTORNEY AT LAW, L.L.C. TALUKDAR, ARVIND

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2431 Ex Parte Hamalainen 10546641 - (D) MORGAN 103 FASTH LAW OFFICES (ROLF FASTH) SU, SARAH

2443 Ex Parte Arimilli et al 12342691 - (D) SHIANG 102 IBM CORP. (WIP) c/o WALDER INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW, P.C. BELANI, KISHIN G

2492 Ex Parte Rasanen 11156479 - (D) WEINSCHENK 103 Mintz Levin/San Diego Office MOORTHY, ARAVIND K

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3762 Ex Parte Gunderson et al 11096851 - (D) ADAMS 112(1)/102/103 Medtronic, Inc. (CRDM) STOKLOSA, JOSEPH A

AFFIRMED-IN-PART 
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2116 Ex Parte Mohrmann, III 11465637 - (D) FRAHM 103 103 TERRILE, CANNATTI, CHAMBERS & HOLLAND, LLP CHOUDHURY, ZAHID

See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 425 (CCPA 1981) (“The test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference[.]”).

Keller, In re, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981) 707.07(f) , 2145

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2887 Ex Parte Reignoux et al 11629893 - (D) OWENS 103 103 OSHA LIANG L.L.P. STANFORD, CHRISTOPHER J

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2161 Ex Parte PELTON 11860115 - (D) COURTENAY 103 Cisco c/o Leon R Turkevich Manelli Selter PLLC KHOSHNOODI, FARIBORZ

Specifically, the scope of the claimed “prescribed presentation preference” is not defined and thus, appears to depend solely on the unrestrained, subjective opinion of a particular individual purportedly practicing the invention. See Datamize, LLC v. Plumtree Software, Inc., 417 F.3d 1342, 1350 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (“The scope of claim language cannot depend solely on the unrestrained, subjective opinion of a particular individual purportedly practicing the invention. See Application of Musgrave, 57 C.C.P.A. 1352, 431 F.2d 882, 893 (1970) (noting ‘[a] step requiring the exercise of subjective judgment without restriction might be objectionable as rendering a claim indefinite’). Some objective standard must be provided in order to allow the public to determine the scope of the claimed invention.” (emphasis added)).

Datamize LLC v. Plumtree Software, Inc., 417 F.3d 1342, 75 USPQ2d 1801 (Fed. Cir. 2005) 2173.05(b)
...

“When different words or phrases are used in separate claims, a difference in meaning is presumed.” Nystrom v. TREX Co., Inc., 424 F.3d 1136, 1143 (Fed. Cir. 2005). Under the doctrine of claim differentiation, “the presence of a dependent claim that adds a particular limitation gives rise to a presumption that the limitation in question is not present in the independent claim.” Phillips v. AWH Corp, 415 F.3d 1303, 1315 (Fed. Cir. 2005). This presumption is “especially strong when the limitation in dispute is the only meaningful difference between an independent and dependent claim, and one party is urging that the limitation in the dependent claim should be read into the independent claim.” SunRace Roots Enterprise Co., Ltd. v. SRAM Corp., 336 F.3d 1298, 1303 (Fed. Cir. 2003).

Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303, 75 USPQ2d 1321 (Fed. Cir. 2005) 2111 , 2111.01 , 2143.01 , 2258

Sunrace Roots Enter. Co. v. SRAM Corp., 336 F.3d 1298, 67 USPQ2d 1438 (Fed. Cir. 2003) 2111.01

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2434 Ex Parte Pauly et al 11317464 - (D) FINK 103 PITNEY BOWES INC. SANDERS, STEPHEN

2457 Ex Parte Leermakers 10993391 - (D) SHAW 103 PHILIPS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY & STANDARDS SALL, EL HADJI MALICK

2463 Ex Parte St. Laurent et al 11854417 - (D) KRIVAK 103 THE DIRECTV GROUP, INC. KHIRODHAR, MAHARISHI V

2491 Ex Parte SAWICKI et al 12143134 - (D) WORMMEESTER 103 Stevens Law Group BECHTEL, KEVIN M

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2616 Ex Parte Baardse et al 12052610 - (D) BOUDREAU 102 Siemens Corporation GOOD JOHNSON, MOTILEWA

2644 Ex Parte Naim et al 11274015 - (D) COURTENAY 103 SPRINT HEIBER, SHANTELL LAKETA

Nystrom, Phillips, sunrace

custom search

REVERSED

Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1779 Ex Parte Fetvedt 12069938 - (D) CRUMBLEY 103 37 C.F.R. 41.50(b)103 Agilent Technologies, Inc. in care of: CPA Global KILPATRICK, BRYAN T

1785 Ex Parte Deevi et al 11438226 - (D) TIMM 103 BUCHANAN, INGERSOLL & ROONEY PC CHAU, LINDA N

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2678 Ex Parte Perttula 11337936 - (D) BRADEN 103 Nokia Corporation and Alston & Bird LLP MA, TIZE

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3646 Ex Parte Banet et al 11526497 - (D) PLENZLER 103 HUGHES TELEMATICS, INC. ISSING, GREGORY C

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1628 Ex Parte Atkinson 11570887 - (D) GRIMES 103 BIO INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY SERVICES (BIO IPS) LLC STONE, CHRISTOPHER R

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2427 Ex Parte Karaoguz et al 10675489 - (D) COURTENAY 102/103 GARLICK & MARKISON RYAN, PATRICK A

"When different words or phrases are used in separate claims, a difference in meaning is presumed." Nystrom v. TREX Co., Inc., 424 F. 3d 1136, 1143 (Fed. Cir. 2005) Under the doctrine of claim differentiation, "the presence of a dependent claim that adds a particular limitation gives rise to a presumption that the limitation in question is not present in the independent claim." Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F. 3d 1303, 1315 (Fed. Cir. 2005).  This presumption is "especially strong when the limitation in dispute is the only meaningful difference between an independent and dependent claim, and one party is urging that the limitation in the dependent claim should be read into the independent claim." Sunrace Roots Enterprise Co., Ltd. v. SRAM Corp., 336 F. 3d 1298 (Fed. Cir. 2003).

Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303, 75 USPQ2d 1321 (Fed. Cir. 2005) 2111, 2111.01, 2143.01, 2258

Sunrace Roots Enter. Co. v. SRAM Corp., 336 F.3d 1298, 67 USPQ2d 1438 (Fed. Cir. 2003) 2111.01

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design

3761 Ex Parte Lindsay et al 11245751 - (D) PLENZLER 103 TERUMO CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS CORPORATION WIEST, PHILIP R

velander, sunrace, ullstrand, genentech

REVERSED
1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1715 Ex Parte Takenaka et al 10/540,606 BEST 103(a) RATNERPRESTIA EXAMINER TALBOT, BRIAN K

1732 Ex Parte Fine et al 11/279,029 SMITH 103(a) STEPTOE & JOHNSON LLP EXAMINER VADEN, KENNETH I

1767 Ex Parte Laredo et al 11/759,551 SMITH 112(2)/102(b)/non-statutory obviousness type double patenting PHILIP S. JOHNSON JOHNSON & JOHNSON EXAMINER PEPITONE, MICHAEL F

1771 Ex Parte Niccum et al 10/711,308 PER CURIAM 103(a) KELLOGG BROWN & ROOT LLC ATTN: Christian Heausler EXAMINER BOYER, RANDY

1773 Ex Parte Miller et al 11/500,672 TIMM 103(a) DADE BEHRING INC. EXAMINER WRIGHT, PATRICIA KATHRYN

1783 Ex Parte Henry et al 10/558,753 SMITH 103(a) Baker Donelson Bearman Caldwell & Berkowitz PC EXAMINER MEHTA, MEGHA S

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2168 Ex Parte Sasai et al 10/446,941 HOFF 103(a) McDERMOTT, WILL & EMERY EXAMINER AHN, SANGWOO

2186 Ex Parte Lee 10/453,226 HOMERE 102/103 DICKSTEIN SHAPIRO LLP EXAMINER PATEL, HETUL B

2400 Networking, Mulitplexing, Cable, and Security
2474 Ex Parte CHEN et al 10/779,234 MANTIS MERCADER 103(a) TKHR (Broadcom) EXAMINER RIYAMI, ABDULLAH A

2600 Communications
2618 Ex Parte Sumcad et al 10/875,001 KRIVAK 103(a) General Motors Corporation EXAMINER SAFAIPOUR, BOBBAK

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3663 Ex Parte Zhang et al 11/372,807 ASTORINO 102(b)/103(a) MILLER IP GROUP, PLC GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION EXAMINER ALGAHAIM, HELAL A

3671 Ex Parte Lauer 11/235,749 BAUMEISTER 103(a) TAYLOR IP, P.C. EXAMINER MCGOWAN, JAMIE LOUISE

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3731 Ex Parte Schraga 10/878,390 SCHEINER 103(a) GREENBLUM & BERNSTEIN, P.L.C. EXAMINER MILES, JONATHAN WADE

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2179 Ex Parte Kim 10/873,549 SMITH 103(a) 101 CAREY, RODRIGUEZ, GREENBERG & O''KEEFE, LLP STEVEN M. GREENBERG EXAMINER LO, WEILUN

2400 Networking, Mulitplexing, Cable, and Security
2437 Ex Parte Bryan et al 10/278,990 WINSOR 103(a) 103(a) VERIZON EXAMINER PYZOCHA, MICHAEL J

AFFIRMED
1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1633 Ex Parte Contag et al 11/529,807 FREDMAN 103(a) Stanford University Office of Technology Licensing Bozicevic, Field & Francis LLP EXAMINER HILL, KEVIN KAI

1644 Ex Parte Fritz et al 10/399,442 FRANKLIN 103(a) nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting WOLF GREENFIELD & SACKS, P.C. EXAMINER DIBRINO, MARIANNE

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1711 Ex Parte Jones et al 11/151,501 GARRIS 103(a) ECOLAB USA INC. EXAMINER HECKERT, JASON MARK

1727 Ex Parte Simmons et al 11/386,612 GAUDETTE 102(b)/103(a) HAMMER & ASSOCIATES, P.C. EXAMINER ARCIERO, ADAM A

1765 Ex Parte Peerlings et al 11/313,419 KRATZ 103(a) BAYER MATERIAL SCIENCE LLC EXAMINER
SERGENT, RABON A

1767 Ex Parte McCabe et al 12/197,622 GARRIS 102(e)/103(a) WOODCOCK WASHBURN LLP EXAMINER PEPITONE, MICHAEL F

1777 Ex Parte Bischof 12/179,658 GARRIS 112(1)/103(a) COOK ALEX LTD. EXAMINER MENON, KRISHNAN S

1782 Ex Parte Buchanan 10/752,898 FRANKLIN 112(2)/103(a) ERIC D. JORGENSON EXAMINER LEFF, STEVEN N

We add that one of ordinary skill in the art, armed with the knowledge provided by both Fischer (which discloses a pet feeding product in general, wherein a dog is specifically disclosed) and Smith (a catnip ball played by a cat), would have been led to Appellant’s claimed subject matter by incorporating the teachings of Smith into Fischer as proposed by the Examiner, with a reasonable expectation of successfully making the toy product as claimed. Under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a), claimed subject matter can be shown to be obvious, and thus unpatentable, if it is shown that a person having ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of successfully achieving the claimed invention. See, e.g., Velander v. Garner, 348 F.3d 1359, 1379 (Fed. Cir. 2003).

2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2162 Ex Parte West 10/890,563 FRAHM 102(a) BAKER BOTTS L.L.P. EXAMINER LE, THU NGUYET T

2400 Networking, Mulitplexing, Cable, and Security
2424 Ex Parte Okamoto et al 10/173,316 THOMAS 103(a) HARNESS, DICKEY & PIERCE, P.L.C. EXAMINER SHEPARD, JUSTIN E

2444 Ex Parte Holzmann 10/873,665 PERRY 102(e)/103(a) LARSON NEWMAN, LLP EXAMINER SERRAO, RANODHI N

2600 Communications
2624 Ex Parte Kondo 10/481,722 MacDONALD 102(b) William S Frommer Frommer Lawrence & Haug EXAMINER TORRES, JOSE

2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2816 Ex Parte Afentakis et al 11/439,410 MacDONALD 102(e)/103(a) SHARP LABORATORIES OF AMERICA, INC. C/O LAW OFFICE OF GERALD MALISZEWSKI EXAMINER O'TOOLE, COLLEEN J

The term “connected” is not a term of art and thus, should receive its ordinary and accustomed meaning. Sunrace Roots Enterprise Co., Ltd. v. SRAM Corp., 336 F.3d 1298, 1302 (Fed. Cir. 2003). The plain meaning of the word “connect” is “[t]o join or unite; to conjoin, in almost any manner, either by junction, [or] by any intervening means.” (Webster’s 1828 Dictionary, http://1828.mshaffer.com/). Furthermore, the word “connected” is restricted to neither a direct nor an indirect connection, and the term is therefore applicable to an indirect connection. Ullstrand v. Coons, 147 F.2d 698, 700 (C.C.P.A. 1945). “To be joined or connected does not necessitate a direct joining or connection.” Genentech, Inc. v. Chiron Corp., 112 F.3d 495, 501 (Fed. Cir. 1997).

Sunrace Roots Enter. Co. v. SRAM Corp., 336 F.3d 1298, 67 USPQ2d 1438 (Fed. Cir.2003) . . . .2106, 2111.01

Genentech, Inc. v. Chiron Corp., 112 F.3d 495, 42 USPQ2d 1608 (Fed. Cir. 1997) . . . 2111.03, 2138.05, 2163

2834 Ex Parte Kaplan et al 10/360,111 MacDONALD 103(a) DYKEMA GOSSETT PLLC EXAMINER MULLINS, BURTON S

2884 Ex Parte Fan et al 11/627,061 KOHUT 102(e)/103(a) 3M INNOVATIVE PROPERTIES COMPANY EXAMINER MALEVIC, DJURA

REHEARING

DENIED
3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU)
2143 Ex Parte 7287109 et al Inter Partes RAMBUS, INC. Patent Owner v. NVIDIA CORP.
Requestor 95/001,166 10/966,767 EASTHOM 37 C.F.R. §41.50(b)(1) FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, GARRETT & DUNNER LLP EXAMINER ESCALANTE, OVIDIO original EXAMINER NEURAUTER, GEORGE C