Search for: "Ex Parte Yielding"
Results 281 - 300
of 475
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
27 Jun 2013, 8:00 pm
In Ex parte CHAUVIN. [read post]
15 Jun 2013, 5:51 am
There is a mixed decision in Ex parte Liang.The appellant wins on indefiniteness but loses on obviousness.Of indefiniteness:“The test for definiteness is whether one skilled in the art would understand the bounds of the claim when read in light of the specification. [read post]
11 Jun 2013, 7:05 pm
The appellant lost in Ex parte WeinerKSR is mentioned:“The combination of familiar elements according to known methodsis likely to be obvious when it does no more than yield predictable results. [read post]
11 Jun 2013, 1:53 pm
One possible inquiry is: Should, may, or must the former spouse of a prospective adoptive or foster parent be contacted by the agency as part of the home study process? [read post]
11 Jun 2013, 1:53 pm
One possible inquiry is: Should, may, or must the former spouse of a prospective adoptive or foster parent be contacted by the agency as part of the home study process? [read post]
7 Jun 2013, 6:49 am
From Ex parte WillisWe agree with the Examiner that modifying Istfan to terminate anorder attempt if the individual group member submits a predeterminednumber of consecutive invalid orders, as taught by Kou, is nothing morethan a combination of prior art elements according to their establishedfunctions, and yields a predictable result. [read post]
4 Jun 2013, 7:38 am
The appellant loses in Ex parte FischerOf law:“From the standpoint of patent law, a compound and all of itsproperties are inseparable; they are one and the same thing. [read post]
30 May 2013, 11:10 am
from Ex parte ANNIE AUDIBERTThe issue in the case:Did the Examiner reversibly err in concluding the claimed invention, inparticular controlling drilling based on the C13/C12 ratio measured fromcontinuously extracted constituents from continuously sampled drilling fluid,would have been obvious over the combination of Aquilina, Bond, and Delaune? [read post]
9 May 2013, 9:41 pm
from Ex parte DE VILLIERS The Examiner reasons that a change in marker orientation would have been a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results (Ans. 9-10, citing MPEP § 2141).Yes, KSR is invoked:We agree with the Examiner’s rationale and adopt is as our own. [read post]
27 Mar 2013, 6:43 am
The dangers of a trend of granting ex-parte injunction in patent infringement suits have especially been highlighted time and again in this blog (see here and here). [read post]
19 Mar 2013, 7:11 am
From within Ex parte Klotzer Construing a means-plus-function claim limitation is a two-stepprocess. [read post]
14 Mar 2013, 4:31 am
Part of the discussion may focus on patent troll metrics, on which I have previously reported. [read post]
11 Mar 2013, 9:04 am
From Ex parte MoffattThe examiner lost on indefiniteness rejections:Further, becausethe MOVs are movable components (Spec. [read post]
11 Mar 2013, 7:40 am
§ 3553(a), as held by the Sixth Circuit; (ii) may consider those factors only to the extent that they yield a smaller sentence reduction than the defendant’s assistance alone would warrant, as held by the Seventh, Eighth, Tenth, and Eleventh Circuits; or (iii) may consider those factors to grant either a smaller or a larger sentence reduction, as held by the Fourth and Ninth Circuits. [read post]
6 Mar 2013, 10:44 am
An IP address alone may yield subscriber information. [read post]
3 Mar 2013, 5:25 am
From Ex parte Hosoi Of KSR:“The combination of familiar elements according to known methodsis likely to be obvious when it does no more than yield predictable results. [read post]
3 Mar 2013, 5:21 am
From Ex parte ViolaAs to the prima facie case of obviousness:“In proceedings before the Patent and Trademark Office, theExaminer bears the burden of establishing a prima face case of obviousnessbased upon the prior art. [read post]
1 Mar 2013, 1:27 pm
” This was no failing on Kinnaird’s part – the hypotheticals are simply impossible to separate and the “significant risk” test has no clear demarcating line. [read post]
20 Feb 2013, 5:17 am
The Board affirmed the Examiner in an appeal of ex parte re-exam 90/009,930, Ex parte SIMS VIBRATION LABORATORY, INC. .The subject matter is directed to an archery bow:In combination:an archery bow which comprises a riser and first andsecond limbs extending in opposite directions from opposite ends of said riser;at least one pair of components for modifying the decay patterns of the vibrations set up in the bow limbs when an arrow is released; anda component… [read post]
Attacking References Individually: Obviousness Rejection Upheld by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board
14 Feb 2013, 8:57 am
In today's Ex parte Naoki Soejima (Appeal No. 2011-000339) decision, the claims involved a method of manufacturing a cover for a vehicle airbag. [read post]
