REVERSED
Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2432 Ex Parte Singh 12331365 - (D) MCMILLIN 102/103 Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP Adobe Systems, Inc. 58083 LANIER, BENJAMIN E
2467 Ex Parte GRAY et al 12336860 - (D) THOMAS 103 VERIZON FOUD, HICHAM B
AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 2600 Communications
2692 Ex Parte Nam et al 11860240 - (D) McCARTNEY 103 103 Innovation Counsel LLP ABDIN, SHAHEDA A
AFFIRMED
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2173 Ex Parte Schumacher et al 11710243 - (D) HUME 103 HOWISON & ARNOTT, L.L.P SHIH, HAOSHIAN
Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2427 Ex Parte Richter et al 11194914 - (D) COURTENAY 103 Cantor Colburn LLP - Carrier SCHNURR, JOHN R
2442 Ex Parte Shepherd et al 10205993 - (D) HORVATH 103 Cuenot, Forsythe & Kim, LLC MACILWINEN, JOHN MOORE JAIN
Tech Center 2600 Communications
2645 Ex Parte Bosch et al 11928307 - (D) WINSOR 102/103 Davidson Sheehan LLP Alcatel-Lucent USA Inc. HAMMONDS, MARCUS C
Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3766 Ex Parte Brynelsen et al 12145430 - (D) BROWNE 103 IntraPace & Townsend & Townsend & Crew LLP HELLER, TAMMIE K
3766 Ex Parte Tockman et al 12685445 - (D) STAICOVICI 103 41.50 103 Faegre Baker Daniels LLP GEDEON, BRIAN T
"The law is replete with cases in which the difference between the claimed invention and the prior art is some range or other variable within the claims. ... In such a situation, the applicant must show that the particular range is critical, generally by showing that the claimed range achieves unexpected results relative to the prior art range." In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 1578 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (emphasis added). In the case, Applicants have not shown that the claimed angle ranges are critical.
Woodruff, In re, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990) 2144.05
