REVERSED
2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2165 Ex Parte Cragun et al 10/600,382 PERRY 103(a) IBM CORPORATION EXAMINER HICKS, MICHAEL J
2179 Ex Parte Grotjohn 10/329,277 HOMERE 101/102(b) STEVEN M. GREENBERG CAREY, RODRIGUEZ, GREENBERG & O'KEEFE, LLP EXAMINER CHUONG, TRUC T
3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3749 Ex Parte Hesse et al 10/917,836 STAICOVICI 103(a) FRANK ROSENBERG EXAMINER PRICE, CARL D
AFFIRMED-IN-PART
2400 Networking, Mulitplexing, Cable, and Security
2444 Ex Parte Ooki et al 10/668,260 BISK 103(a) 103(a) WHITHAM, CURTIS & CHRISTOFFERSON & COOK, P.C. EXAMINER BENGZON, GREG C
3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3622 Ex Parte Datar et al 11/394,135 KIM 112(2)/103(a) 103(a) Straub & Pokotylo EXAMINER SORKOWITZ, DANIEL M
3629 Ex Parte DiMarco 10/379,188 FETTING 112(1)/103(a) 103(a) ANTHONY M. DIMARCO EXAMINER MCCORMICK, GABRIELLE A
AFFIRMED
2600 Communications
2612 Ex Parte Heller 10/354,842 MOORE 103(a) Florek & Endres PLLC EXAMINER SWARTHOUT, BRENT
See also Monarch Knitting Machinery v. Sulzer Morat GMBH, 139 F.3d 877, 884 (Fed. Cir. 1998) (“The relevant secondary consideration is ‘long-felt but unsolved need,’ not long-felt need in isolation.”).
2629 Ex Parte Kuroki 10/572,044 ZECHER 102(b)/103(a) RADER FISHMAN & GRAUER PLLC EXAMINER STEINBERG, JEFFREY S
2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2887 Ex Parte Swaine et al 10/992,450 HUGHES 103(a) PAUL W. MARTIN NCR CORPORATION EXAMINER LE, THIEN MINH
3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3652 Ex Parte Schmid 10/350,239 BAHR 103(a) GREER, BURNS & CRAIN, LTD. EXAMINER LOWE, MICHAEL S
3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3721 Ex Parte Boswinkel et al 12/002,914 STAICOVICI 112(2)/102(b) Nields, Lemack & Frame, LLC EXAMINER SMITH, SCOTT A
3732 Ex Parte Szymaitis 11/511,052 KAUFFMAN 112(1) BUCHANAN INGERSOLL & ROONEY PC EXAMINER ROSEN, ERIC J
see also Purdue Pharma L.P. v. Faulding, Inc., 230 F.3d 1320, 1326-27 (Fed. Cir. 2000) (“one cannot disclose a forest in the original application, and then later pick a tree out of the forest and say [‘]here is my invention.[’] In order to satisfy the written description requirement, the blaze marks directing the skilled artisan to that tree must be in the originally filed disclosure.”).
Purdue Pharma L.P. v. Faulding, Inc., 230 F.3d 1320, 56 USPQ2d 1481 (Fed. Cir. 2000) . . . . .2163, 2163.05
