REVERSED

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1782 Ex Parte Dronzek 10/292,231 GARRIS HANLON OWENS 112(2)/103(a) HEDMAN & COSTIGAN, P.C. EXAMINER AUGHENBAUGH, WALTER

2400 Networking, Mulitplexing, Cable, and Security
2442 Ex Parte Rothermel 09/954,077 KRIVAK RUGGIERO HOFF 103(a)/101 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) VENABLE LLP EXAMINER HAMZA, FARUK

Although a computer may be patent eligible if it “is programmed to perform particular functions pursuant to instructions from program software,” In re Alappat, 33 F.3d 1526, 1545 (Fed. Cir. 1994), here, there is no hardware that executes the claimed code.

Alappat, In re, 33 F.3d 1526, 31 USPQ2d1545 (Fed. Cir. 1994). . . . . . . . . . . . 2106, 2106.02

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3695 Ex Parte Ghafoor et al 10/051,355 MOHANTY LORIN FISCHETTI 112(2)/103(a) PAUL W. MARTIN NCR CORPORATION, LAW DEPT. EXAMINER CHENCINSKI, SIEGFRIED E

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3748 Ex Parte Roozenboom 11/342,630 SONG DELMENDO BOALICK 102(b) EXAMINER TRAN, BINH Q CATERPILLAR/FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, L.L.P.

3769 Ex Parte Wilkens et al 10/094,431 BAHR STAICOVICI BARRETT 103(a) Harding, Earley, Follmer & Frailey EXAMINER SHAY, DAVID M

The Examiner's speculative reasoning therefore does not serve as a rational underpinning supporting the Examiner's proposed combination. See In re Warner, 379 F.2d 1011, 1017 (CCPA 1967) ("The Patent Office … may not, because it may doubt that the invention is patentable, resort to speculation, unfounded assumptions or hindsight reconstruction to supply deficiencies in its factual basis").

Warner, In re, 379 F.2d 1011, 154 USPQ 173 (CCPA 1967) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2142

AFFIRMED-IN-PART

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3671 Ex Parte Spinelli 11/150,545 KERINS HORNER SILVERBERG 102(b)/103(a)/112(2)37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) THOMAS SPINELLI, ESQ. EXAMINER HARTMANN, GARY S

3651 Ex Parte Goddard et al 11/107,850 HORNER KERINS BARRETT 102(e)/103(a) MORGAN LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP EXAMINER COLLINS, MICHAEL

3671 Ex Parte Levinsohn 11/394,283 BAHR KERINS MCCARTHY 103(a) EXAMINER MAYO-PINNOCK, TARA LEIGH Davidson, Davidson & Kappel, LLC

See In re Chevenard, 139 F.2d 711, 713 (CCPA 1943) (if an applicant does not seasonably traverse the taking of official notice, then the object of the official notice is taken to be admitted prior art); Ahlert, 424 F.2d at 1091 (where an applicant for a patent has failed to challenge a fact officially noticed by the Examiner, and it is clear that the applicant has been amply apprised of such finding so as to have the opportunity to make such challenge, the Examiner’s finding shall be considered conclusive).

Chevenard, In re, 139 F.2d 71, 60 USPQ 239 (CCPA 1943) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2144.03

Ahlert, In re, 424 F.2d 1088, 165 USPQ 418 (CCPA 1970) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2144.03

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3774 Ex Parte Serhan et al 10/340,259 HORNER BAHR STAICOVICI 112(1)/103(a) 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) Maginot, Moore & Beck LLP EXAMINER STEWART, ALVIN J

See In re Chu, 66 F.3d 292, 298-99 (Fed. Cir. 1995) (“design choice” is appropriate where the applicant fails to set forth any reasons why the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art would result in a different function or give unexpected results) (citations omitted).

Chu, In re, 66 F.3d 292, 36 USPQ2d 1089(Fed. Cir. 1995) . . . . . . . 201.11, 716.02(f), 1504.20,2145

REISSUE AFFIRMED-IN-PART

2400 Networking, Mulitplexing, Cable, and Security
2435 Ex Parte Dalvi et al 10/094,056 6,035,401 JEFFERY MacDONALD HOFF 251 TROP, PRUNER & HU, P.C. EXAMINER SONG, HOSUK

A limitation “materially narrows” the reissue claims if the narrowing limitation is directed to one or more “overlooked aspects” of the invention. Hester Indus., Inc. v. Stein, Inc., 142 F.3d 1472, 1482-83 (Fed. Cir. 1998).

Hester Industries, Inc. v. Stein, Inc., 142 F.3d 1472, 46 USPQ2d 1641(Fed. Cir. 1998). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1412.02

AFFIRMED

2857 Ex Parte Grey et al 10/289,798 EXAMINER WEST, JEFFREY R
2472 Ex Parte Jarett 10/414,864 EXAMINER NGUYEN, BRIAN D
2626 Ex Parte Lux 10/737,977 EXAMINER SHAH, PARAS D
2167 Ex Parte Maria Meijer et al 10/809,171 EXAMINER LOVEL, KIMBERLY M
1741 Ex Parte Yang et al 10/939,277 EXAMINER LAZORCIK, JASON L

REHEARING

GRANTED-IN-PART, DENIED-IN-PART

2854 Ex Parte Iwamoto et al 10/543,051 EXAMINER CULLER, JILL E

DENIED

2183 Ex Parte Lataille et al 11/526,870 EXAMINER PARTRIDGE, WILLIAM B

DENIED

2175 Ex Parte Morrison et al 09/738,050 EXAMINER VU, THANH T