REVERSED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1656 Ex Parte Yokoyama et al 12541220 - (D) POLLOCK 103 CERMAK NAKAJIMA MCGOWAN LLP MOORE, WILLIAM W
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2159 Ex Parte Aoyama et al 12323633 - (D) POTHIER 103 41.50(b) 101 DAMBROSIO & MENON, P.L.L.C. CONYERS, DAWAUNE A
Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2466 Ex Parte Tallet 11297027 - (D) SILVERMAN 103 PATTERSON & SHERIDAN, LLP/CISC CRUTCHFIELD, CHRISTOPHER M
Tech Center 2600 Communications
2656 Ex Parte Alexander et al 11644651 - (D) BUI 103 BROOKS KUSHMAN P.C. /Oracle America/ SUN / STK MCCORD, PAUL C
Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3641 Ex Parte CONSTANT et al 11972018 - (D) STEPINA 103 Ballard Spahr LLP CLEMENT, MICHELLE RENEE
3688 Ex Parte Theiste et al 10641173 - (D) MEDLOCK 103 HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP VANDERHORST, MARIA VICTORIA
Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3729 Ex Parte Cherry 12260670 - (D) MARSCHALL 102 PRICE HENEVELD LLP KUE, KAYING
3777 Ex Parte Avni et al 10551053 - (D) GRIMES 103 Pearl Cohen Zedek Latzer Baratz LLP BRUTUS, JOEL F
AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2156 Ex Parte Isberg et al 12630908 - (D) McKEOWN 102 102 COATS & BENNETT/SONY ERICSSON VO, TRUONG V
Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2837 Ex Parte Dudde et al 11572791 - (D) HOUSEL 103 103 LATHROP & GAGE LLP CHAN, KAWING
2845 Ex Parte Baker 11818996 - (D) NAGUMO 103 103 FLETCHER YODER (MICRON TECHNOLOGY, INC.) JEAN PIERRE, PEGUY
To be clear, the issue is not the adequacy of the original disclosure, which is directed to persons having ordinary skill in the art. Rather, the issue is whether the record contains sufficient evidence that a non-expert reviewer can make adequate findings to draw conclusions as to the meaning of these terms to the artisan. Cf. In re Mayne, 104 F.3d 1339, 1344 (Fed. Cir. 1997) in which the Applicant tried to show unexpected results. The court held that “[e]ven were it obvious to a practitioner of the art, applicants have the burden to provide the PTO with evidence showing that such is the case.”
Mayne, In re, 104 F.3d 1339, 41 USPQ2d 1451 (Fed. Cir. 1977) 2144.09 , 2145
AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1629 Ex Parte Epstein et al 11158452 - (D) GRIMES 103 SEAGER, TUFTE & WICKHEM, LLC LUNDGREN, JEFFREY S
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1771 Ex Parte Keppers 12378671 - (D) ANKENBRAND 103 EMCH, SCHAFFER, SCHAUB & PORCELLO CO BOYER, RANDY
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2199 Ex Parte Lin et al 11615891 - (D) FINK 102/103 KONRAD RAYNES DAVDA & VICTOR, LLP IBM54 GOORAY, MARK A
Tech Center 2600 Communications
2614 Ex Parte Tanaka et al 11921741 - (D) COURTENAY 103 OLIFF PLC YANG, RYAN R
2641 Ex Parte Hildebrand et al 10536253 - (D) HUME 112(2) 103 Carstens & Cahoon, LLP AJIBADE AKONAI, OLUMIDE
2687 Ex Parte Michalk et al 11948774 - (D) GAUDETTE 103 Sheridan Ross PC TWEEL JR, JOHN ALEXANDER
Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3745 Ex Parte McCaffrey 11775523 - (D) HOFFMANN 102/103 CARLSON, GASKEY & OLDS/PRATT & WHITNEY ELLIS, RYAN H
