REVERSED
2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2163 Ex Parte Liu et al 11/343,012 ZECHER 102(b) EMC CORPORATION c/o DALY, CROWLEY, MOFFORD & DURKEE, LLP EXAMINER NGUYEN, KIM T
3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3731 Ex Parte Petersen 10/762,643 BONILLA 103(a) SEAGER, TUFTE & WICKHEM, LLC EXAMINER SEVERSON, RYAN J
AFFIRMED-IN-PART
3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3726 Ex Parte Berson et al 12/420,117 HOMERE Concurring JEFFERY 102(b)/103(a) POLSINELLI SHUGHART PC EXAMINER WILENSKY, MOSHE K
AFFIRMED
1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1775 Ex Parte Dzenitis et al 11/000,491 LANE 103(a) Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC LAWRENCE LIVERMORE NATIONAL LABORATORY EXAMINER EDWARDS, LYDIA E
A reference that is not enabled may not act as anticipatory prior art. Elan Pharm., Inc. v. Mayo Found. For Med. Educ. & Research, 346 F.3d 1051, 1054 (Fed. Cir 2003). However, “[e]ven if a reference discloses an inoperative device, it is prior art for all that it teaches.” Beckman Instruments, Inc. v. LKB Produckter AB, 892 F.2d 1547, 1551 (Fed. Cir. 1989). "While a reference must enable someone to practice the invention in order to anticipate under §102(b), a non-enabling reference may qualify as prior art for the purpose of determining obviousness under § 103." Symbol Tech. v. Opticon, Inc., 935 F.2d 1569, 1578 (Fed. Cir. 1991).
Elan Pharm., Inc. v. Mayo Foundation For Medical and Education Research, 346 F.3d 1051, 68 USPQ2d 1373
(Fed. Cir. 2003). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2121.01
Beckman Instruments v. LKB Produkter AB, 892 F.2d 1547, 13 USPQ2d 1301 (Fed. Cir. 1989). . . . . . . .2121.01
Symbol Techs., Inc. v. Opticon, Inc., 935 F.2d 1569, 19 USPQ2d 1241 (Fed. Cir. 1991).. . . . . 804.01, 2121.01
3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3731 Ex Parte Seifert et al 10/357,940 FRANKLIN 103(a) VISTA IP LAW GROUP LLP EXAMINER NGUYEN, TUAN VAN
