SEARCH

PTAB.US: Decisions of PTAB Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Monday, November 21, 2011

SNQ, exxon chem

REVERSED

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3618 Ex Parte Dresher 11/293,199 SAINDON 103(a) TAIYO CORPORATION EXAMINER
RESTIFO, JEFFREY J

3628 Ex Parte Ogg 10/677,619 KIM 112(2)/103(a) FULBRIGHT & JAWORSKI L.L.P EXAMINER JOSEPH, TONYA S

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3721 Ex Parte Keskiniva et al 10/563,821 BARRETT 102(b)/103(a) DRINKER BIDDLE & REATH (DC) EXAMINER LOPEZ, MICHELLE

AFFIRMED-IN-PART

2400 Networking, Mulitplexing, Cable, and Security
2424 Ex Parte Rakib 09/898,728 MANTIS MERCADER 103(a) 103(a) MOTOROLA SOLUTIONS, INC. EXAMINER ANDRAMUNO, FRANKLIN S

3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3711 Ex Parte Jurmain et al 10/387,792 BAHR 103(a) 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 103(a) SHERRILL LAW OFFICES EXAMINER CEGIELNIK, URSZULA M

REEXAMINATION

EXAMINER AFFIRMED

3900 Central Reexamination Unit (CRU)
3711 Ex Parte 6623381 et al ACUSHNET COMPANY Requester and Respondent v. Patent of CALLAWAY GOLF COMPANY Patent Owner and Appellant 95/000,444 DELMENDO 102(b)/103(a) Patent Owner: THE TOP-FLITE GOLF COMPANY, A WHOLLY OWNED SUBSIDIARY OF CALLAWAY GOLF COMPANY Third-Party Requester: MAYER BROWN LLP EXAMINER GELLNER, JEFFREY L original EXAMINER GORDEN, RAEANN

For ex parte reexaminations, the USPTO has clarified the procedure for seeking review of issues pertaining to substantial new question of patentability. See Clarification on the Procedure for Seeking Review of a Finding of a Substantial New Question of Patentability in Ex Parte Reexamination Proceedings, 75 Fed. Reg. 36357-58 (Dep’t of Commerce, June 25, 2010) (hereinafter “Notice”) (delegating the authority to review issues related to the Examiner's determination that a reference raises a substantial new question of patentability to the Chief Administrative Patent Judge, who may further delegate this authority to a panel of Administrative Patent Judges deciding the appeal in the ex parte reexamination proceeding).

The Notice, however, explicitly states that the delegation of review authority provided for review of an Examiner’s SNQ determination in ex parte reexaminations does not apply to inter partes reexaminations. See Notice, 75 Fed. Reg. at 36,358 (“The procedure set forth in this notice does not apply to inter partes reexamination proceedings. A determination by the USPTO in an inter partes reexamination either that no SNQ has been raised or that a reference raises a SNQ is final and non-appealable.”).

AFFIRMED

1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1761 Ex Parte Wietfeldt et al 11/808,305 TIMM 103(a) S.C. JOHNSON & SON, INC. EXAMINER HARDEE, JOHN R

A composition is a mixture of substances that contains the specified ingredients at any time from the moment at which the ingredients are mixed together. See Exxon Chem. Pats. Inc. v. Lubrizol Corp., 64 F.3d 1553, 1557 (Fed. Cir 1995).

3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3627 Ex Parte de Gruil 11/857,492 KIM 103(a) PAUL W. MARTIN NCR CORPORATION EXAMINER ROJAS, HAJIME S

3644 Ex Parte Huynh 10/112,815 KAUFFMAN 103(a) ALSTON & BIRD, LLP EXAMINER
DINH, TIEN QUANG