REVERSED
1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1633 Ex Parte Cooper et al 10/656,192 GREEN 102(b)/103(a) BANNER & WITCOFF, LTD. EXAMINER LONG, SCOTT
1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1781 Ex Parte Richey et al 10/944,209 GRIMES 103(a) DICKINSON WRIGHT PLLC EXAMINER BEKKER, KELLY JO
The Examiner’s argument that the configuration of the strands is a matter of design choice is not persuasive. Design choice may be an acceptable rationale for an obviousness rejection when a claimed product merely arranges known elements in a configuration recognized as functionally equivalent to a known configuration. See In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 555 (CCPA 1975) (“The manner in which electrical contact is made for Smith’s battery would be an obvious matter of design choice within the skill of the art…. As the board pointed out, use of a spring-loaded contact in the manner claimed is well known with the common flashlight.”). Here, the Examiner has not provided evidence that the strand configuration recited in the claims was a known alternative to the designs shown by Mills, Kretchmer, and Soderlund.
Kuhle, In re, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2144.04
2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2166 Ex Parte Ouyang et al 10/746,658 ZECHER 103(a) TEXAS INSTRUMENTS INCORPORATED EXAMINER HARPER, ELIYAH STONE
3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3748 Ex Parte Momosaki et al 10/934,380 COCKS 102(b)/103(a) OLIFF & BERRIDGE, PLC EXAMINER TRAN, BINH Q
While patent drawings alone may be used to reject claims, the value of the drawing sin that context extends only to what is clearly shown therein. See In re Mraz, 455 F.2d 1069, 1072 (CCPA 1972).
Mraz, In re, 455 F.2d 1069, 173 USPQ 25 (CCPA 1972). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2125
AFFIRMED
2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2172 Ex Parte Kelley et al 10/777,961 STEPHENS 103(a) SCHMEISER, OLSEN & WATTS EXAMINER PILLAI, NAMITHA
2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2826 Ex Parte Nickerson et al 11/168,784 DROESCH 103(a) TROP, PRUNER & HU, P.C. EXAMINER TRAN, MINH LOAN
3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3721 Ex Parte Scirica 11/544,519 CHEN 103(a) Tyco Healthcare Group LP d/b/a Covidien EXAMINER LOW, LINDSAY M
REVERSED
2817 Ex Parte Pietig 10/538,580 BAUMEISTER 103(a) NXP INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY & LICENSING EXAMINER JONES, STEPHEN E
3717 Ex Parte Rose 10/341,110 SILVERBERG 103(a) NIXON PEABODY LLP EXAMINER
HARPER, TRAMAR YONG
3721 Ex Parte Schneider et al 11/106,806 SILVERBERG 103(a) DAY PITNEY LLP ACCOUNT: ILLINOIS TOOL WORKS INC. EXAMINER HARMON, CHRISTOPHER R
3685 Ex Parte Suermondt et al 10/175,469 TURNER 102(e)/103(a) HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY EXAMINER WORJLOH, JALATEE
AFFIRMED-IN-PART
3714 Ex Parte Darby 10/339,096 SILVERBERG 103(a) K&L Gates LLP EXAMINER COBURN, CORBETT B
AFFIRMED
3627 Ex Parte Bross et al 10/495,633 MOHANTY 103(a) HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY EXAMINER DANNEMAN, PAUL
2155 Ex Parte Campbell et al 11/019,336 JEFFERY 102(e) HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY EXAMINER HOFFLER, RAHEEM
3724 Ex Parte Gilder 11/147,000 SILVERBERG 102(e)/103(a) THE PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY EXAMINER DEXTER, CLARK F
1612 Ex Parte Jentzsch et al 10/515,636 GREEN 102(b)/103(a) OBLON, SPIVAK, MCCLELLAND MAIER & NEUSTADT, L.L.P. EXAMINER WEBB, WALTER E
1796 Ex Parte Jo et al 11/674,390 WALSH 103(a) F. CHAU & ASSOCIATES, LLC EXAMINER NGUYEN, THUY-AI N
3745 Ex Parte REIMER et al 11/535,162 SILVERBERG 103(a) ZARLEY LAW FIRM P.L.C. EXAMINER LOPEZ, FRANK D
