Search for: "Ex Parte Borden"
Results 1 - 20
of 26
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Jan 2013, 8:28 am
Ex parte Borden, 93 USPQ2d 1473 (BPAI 2010) and In re Watts, 354 F.3d 1362 (CAFC 2004) were cited.The matter of non-functional descriptive material was discussed with citations to Ex parte Nehls, 88 USPQ2d 1883 (BPAI 2008 ) and Ex parte Curry, 84 USPQ2d 1272 (BPAI 2005). [read post]
1 May 2013, 6:53 am
Crane and Spada are cited.The Board's 1991 decision in Ex parte Tanksley is cited.Ex parte Borden on reply briefs is cited. [read post]
15 May 2013, 8:21 am
Within Ex parte Ali , one finds a cite to In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 425 about appellant NOT taking into account "the collective teachings of the prior art." [read post]
24 Dec 2014, 5:01 am
A message from Ex parte ANSCHUTZ is the need to develop all needed arguments in the opening brief. [read post]
28 May 2013, 10:41 am
See Ex parte Borden, 93 USPQ2d 1473, 1474 (BPAI2010) (informative).We sustain the rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. [read post]
9 May 2013, 9:21 pm
See Ex parte Borden, http://www.uspto.gov/ip/ boards/bpai/decisions/inform/fd08004312.pdf (informative) (Appellant fails to “explain what ‘good cause’ there might be to consider the new argument. [read post]
5 Feb 2014, 8:38 pm
” Ex parte Borden, 93 USPQ2d 1473, 1474 (BPAI 2010) (Informative). [read post]
25 Nov 2013, 9:00 pm
Cir. 2004); see also Ex parte Nehls, 88 USPQ2d 1883, 1887-89 (BPAI 2008) (precedential) and Ex parte Curry, 84 USPQ2d 1272 (BPAI 2005), aff’d (Fed. [read post]
10 Oct 2013, 5:21 am
Ex parte Borden, 93 USPQ2d 1473, 1477 (BPAI 2010) (informative) (“Properly interpreted, the Rules do not require the Board to take up a belated argument that has not been addressed by the Examiner, absent a showing of good cause. [read post]
27 Dec 2012, 7:50 am
” Ex parte Borden, 93 USPQ2d 1473, 1474 (BPAI 2010) (informative). [read post]
22 Jan 2010, 1:05 pm
Ex parte Nakashima (BPAI 2010); Ex parte Borden (BPAI 2010) Two recent expanded-panel BPAI decisions both consider the situation where a patent applicant presents arguments in a reply brief even though the arguments could have been raised by in the principal brief. [read post]
15 May 2018, 6:30 am
Borden v. [read post]
26 Jan 2010, 12:40 am
" In a January 7, 2010 expanded-panel BPAI ruling ex parte Borden, denying a rehearing of an appeal, the Board ruled much more restrictively on reply briefs: "The reply brief is not an opportunity to make arguments that could have been made during prosecution, but were not. [read post]
21 May 2019, 6:05 am
Borden v. [read post]
3 Apr 2018, 8:05 am
Even after consideration of the claims' recitations of the changing the communication paths and the inclusion of status identifiers, "applicant's claims are still directed to the abstract idea of determining when to display content on machines based on availability with the only modifications being to which part talks to which part of the system and how the system identifies when a part of the system is busy or how to schedule the transmission. [read post]
2 Apr 2018, 6:40 am
Even after consideration of the claims' recitations of the changing the communication paths and the inclusion of status identifiers, "applicant's claims are still directed to the abstract idea of determining when to display content on machines based on availability with the only modifications being to which part talks to which part of the system and how the system identifies when a part of the system is busy or how to schedule the transmission. [read post]
23 Nov 2011, 5:25 am
(re: Sharing His Faith) – from The HR Capitalist, Kris Dunn Public Criticism of Discrimination Claim as Retaliation – from Phil Miles’s Lawffice Space The 2011 EEOC Performance and Accountability Report – from Employment & the Law Social Media & Workplace Technology Managing Your Social Media Mullet—Part 1 – from Jessica Miller-Merrell’s Blogging4Jobs Social Media Training is Important – and More Companies Need To Do It… [read post]
30 Jun 2023, 7:30 am
The case itself involves design patents covering GM parts, such as front fenders. [read post]
19 Jun 2013, 7:16 pm
” Ex parte Borden, 93 USPQ 2d, 1473, 1474 (BPAI 2010)Keller is mentioned:Requester correctly argues that the test is not whether the features of asecondary reference can be bodily incorporated into the primary reference,but what the combined teachings would have suggested to one of ordinaryskill in the art. [read post]
25 Jan 2010, 3:51 am
(EPLAW) The Hague District Court: Ex parte injunction granted: Street Surfing LLC v. [read post]
