REVERSED
1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1761 Ex Parte Evans 10/629,642 GAUDETTE 112(1)/102(b)/103(a) MCCARTER & ENGLISH, LLP HARTFORD EXAMINER OGDEN JR, NECHOLUS
See In re Vaidyanathan, 381 Fed.Appx. 985, 994 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (non-precedential) (“KSR did not free the PTO’s examination process from explaining its reasoning. In making an obviousness rejection, the examiner should not rely on conclusory statements that a particular feature of the invention would have been obvious or was well known. Instead, the examiner should elaborate, discussing the evidence or reasoning that leads the examiner to such a conclusion.”); Perfect Web Techs., Inc. v. InfoUSA, Inc., 587 F.3d 1324, 1330 (Fed. Cir. 2009) (“[T]o invoke ‘common sense’ or any other basis for extrapolating from prior art to a conclusion of obviousness, a district court must articulate its reasoning with sufficient clarity for review.”).
3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3629 Ex Parte Ichikawa et al 10/102,344 FETTING 103(a) HESLIN ROTHENBERG FARLEY & MESITI P.C. EXAMINER CASLER, TRACI
AFFIRMED-IN-PART
2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2189 Ex Parte DeCenzo 11/147,137 HAHN 103(a) 103(a) Fellers, Snider, Blankenship, Bailey & Tippens, P.C. EXAMINER LO, KENNETH M
REEXAMINATION
AFFIRMED
2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2831 Ex Parte 5,763,831 et al Ex parte TayMac Corporation 90/008,823 08/450,559 COCKS 112(1)/102(b)/103(a) PATENT OWNER: BOOTH UDALL, PLC THIRD PARTY REQUESTER: WILLIAM F. PENDERGAST BRINKS, HOFER, GILSON & LIONE EXAMINER GAGLIARDI, ALBERT J original EXAMINER PATEL, DHIRUBHAI R
AFFIRMED
1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1646 Ex Parte Dowling et al 11/016,106 McCOLLUM 101/112(1) MERCK EXAMINER LI, RUIXIANG
2400 Networking, Mulitplexing, Cable, and Security
2455 Ex Parte Hashimoto et al 10/671,905 MANTIS MERCADER 102(e)/103(a) FOLEY AND LARDNER LLP EXAMINER LAZARO, DAVID R
3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3622 Ex Parte Katz et al 10/451,845 FETTING 112(2)/102(E)/103(a) NEIFELD IP LAW, PC EXAMINER RETTA, YEHDEGA
SEARCH
PTAB.US: Decisions of PTAB Patent Trial and Appeal Board
Li & Cai
Wednesday, November 2, 2011
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)