american academy, velander

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1759 Ex Parte Diamond et al 12777396 - (D) SMITH 103 Larson & Anderson, LLC KESSEL, MARIS R

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2818 Ex Parte Kozinsky et al 13716076 - (D) HASTINGS 103 Maginot, Moore & Beck LLP TAYLOR, EARL N

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3738 Ex Parte Sheldon et al 11876666 - (D) GUIJT 103 KNOBBE MARTENS OLSON & BEAR LLP PELLEGRINO, BRIAN E

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2178 Ex Parte Hamm et al 13076069 - (D) JEFFERY 103 103 MAHAMEDI IP LAW LLP HASTY, NICHOLAS

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1789 Ex Parte Huff et al 13270009 - (D) SMITH 103 WOOD, HERRON & EVANS, LLP JUSKA, CHERYL ANN

Thus, we discern no reversible error in the Examiner’s assessment of the weight to be given to the submitted evidence. In re Am. Acad, of Sci. Tech Ctr., 367 F.3d 1359, 1368 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (“[T]he Board is entitled to weigh the declarations and conclude that the lack of factual corroboration warrants discounting the opinions expressed in the declarations.”). See also Velander v. Garner, 348 F.3d 1359, 1371 (Fed. Cir. 2003) (“In giving more weight to prior publications than to subsequent conclusory statements by experts, the Board acted well within [its] discretion.”).

Am. Acad. of Sci. Tech. Ctr., In re, 367 F.3d 1359, 70 USPQ2d 1827 (Fed. Cir. 2004) 2111 , 2111.01

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2157 Ex Parte Tseng et al 14025620 - (D) DEJMEK 103/double patenting Facebook/Fenwick LE, JESSICA N

2194 Ex Parte Cardona et al 14566253 - (D) SAADAT 103 WALDER INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW, P.C. IBM CORP. (WIP) ONAT, UMUT

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2463 Ex Parte Banerjee et al 14020838 - (D) MOORE 102/103 Suman Banerjee MARCELO, MELVIN C

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2617 Ex Parte Dennis 13317342 - (D) MOORE Dissenting ENGLE 103 SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP PATEL, JITESH

REEXAMINATION

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2175 APPLE, INC., EBAY, INC., FACEBOOK, INC., NETFLIX, INC., OFFICE DEPOT, INC., STAPLES, INC., and YAHOO!, INC. Requesters, Appellants, and Cross-Respondents v. INTERVAL LICENSING LLC Patent Owner, Respondent, and Cross-Appellant Ex Parte 6757682 et al 09/656,638 95001576 - (D) JEFFERY 102 EDELL, SHAPIRO & FINNAN, LLC HUGHES, DEANDRA M original RONES, CHARLES

velander, ashland oil

custom search

REVERSED 
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1612 Ex Parte Lichtenberger 12883918 - (D) FREDMAN 103 FOLEY AND LARDNER LLP KISHORE, GOLLAMUDI S

1625 Ex Parte Mathad et al 11572949 - (D) GRIMES 112(1)/103 DR. REDDY''S LABORATORIES, INC. CHANG, CELIA C

Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1746 Ex Parte Broad et al 13098619 - (D) SMITH 102/103 THE PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY HOOVER, MATTHEW

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2163 Ex Parte Ngo et al 11054325 - (D) BOUDREAU 102 37 CFR 41.50(b) 101 VAN PELT, YI & JAMES LLP NGUYEN, KIM T

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2872 Ex Parte Wevers et al 11934509 - (D) SMITH 103 FISH & RICHARDSON P.C. (BO) DOAK, JENNIFER L

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3667 Ex Parte Fukumoto et al 11902383 - (D) HOSKINS 103 POSZ LAW GROUP, PLC SHAFI, MUHAMMAD

AFFIRMED-IN-PART 
Tech Center 2600 Communications
2671 Ex Parte Shibata et al 10772436 - (D) FREDMAN 102/103 102/103 BUCHANAN, INGERSOLL & ROONEY PC MILIA, MARK R

2675 Ex Parte Park et al 11066747 - (D) FREDMAN 103 103 STAAS & HALSEY LLP HON, MING Y

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1765 Ex Parte Silva et al 11232285 - (D) DERRICK 103 SABIC Innovative Plastics LISTVOYB, GREGORY

1793 Ex Parte Rivera et al 12755513 - (D) SMITH 103 BANNER & WITCOFF, LTD. MOORE, WALTER A

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2196 Ex Parte Eldson et al 11210598 - (D) COURTENAY 103 Agilent Technologies, Inc. in care of: CPA Global KESSLER, GREGORY AARON

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2426 Ex Parte Gregorian et al 11260064 - (D) BUI 103 NOVAK DRUCE CONNOLLY BOVE + QUIGG LLP TAYLOR, JOSHUA D

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2618 Ex Parte Knighton et al 11323437 - (D) SHIANG 102 101 BLAKELY SOKOLOFF TAYLOR & ZAFMAN WANG, JIN CHENG

2645 Ex Parte Bejerano et al 10788460 - (D) DANG 103 CAPITOL PATENT & TRADEMARK LAW FIRM, PLLC TORRES, MARCOS L

2652 Ex Parte McKibben et al 10979611 - (D) FREDMAN 103 112(1) Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP SHAH, ANTIM G

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2829 Ex Parte Boettcher et al 12043620 - (D) PRAISS 103 DICKE, BILLIG & CZAJA GUPTA, RAJ R

2882 Ex Parte Zimmerman et al 11840821 - (D) GARRIS 103 STERNE, KESSLER, GOLDSTEIN & FOX P.L.L.C. KIM, PETER B

REEXAMINATION

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2857 INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORPORATION Requester v. AUBURN UNIVERSITY Patent Owner Ex Parte 7,194,366 et al 10/274,439 95001574 - (D) KOHUT 112(1) 102/103 FISH & RICHARDSON P.C. (DC) Third Party Requester: International Business Machines Corporation Jones Day DEB, ANJAN K original TSAI, CAROL S W

We do not find Requester’s expert opinion persuasive. Neither the Examiner nor the Board is bound by statements of an expert in an affidavit, but rather, such evidence should be evaluated and considered for its
probative value, like all other evidence in the record. See Velander v. Garner, 348 F.3d 1359, 1371 (Fed. Cir. 2003) ("It is within the discretion of the trier of fact to give each item of evidence such weight as it feels
appropriate . . . In giving more weight to prior publications than to subsequent conclusory statements by experts, the Board acted well within that discretion"); citing Ashland Oil, Inc. v. Delta Resins & Refractories, Inc., 776 F.2d 281, 294 (Fed.Cir.1985) ("Lack of factual support for expert opinion going to factual determinations, however, may render the testimony of little probative value in a validity determination."). In addition, statements do not become facts merely because they are set forth in declarations. Rather, the statements must be weighed based on their probative value and other objective evidence submitted in support thereof, if any. See Velander, 348 F.3d at 1371; Ashland Oil, 776 F.2d at 294.

Ashland Oil, Inc. v. Delta Resins & Refractories, Inc., 776 F.2d 281, 227 USPQ 657 (Fed. Cir. 1985)  716.01(b) ,   716.01(c) ,  2145

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