Source: http://www.ptab.us/2011/07/reversed-1600-biotechnology-and-organic_28.html
Timestamp: 2017-09-22 04:37:55
Document Index: 175499430

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 41', '§ 112', 'arte 6076094', 'arte 7000325', 'arte 5741705', 'arte 7281842']

PTAB.US: saab, pfizer, pharmastem
1637 Ex Parte Guldberg 10/399,899 ADAMS 103(a) FOLEY AND LARDNER LLP EXAMINER CHUNDURU, SURYAPRABHA
1786 Ex Parte Suzuki et al 10/984,355 SMITH 103(a) BURR & BROWN EXAMINER CROUSE, BRETT ALAN
2444 Ex Parte E et al 10/202,312 STEPHENS 102(e)/103(a) MHKKG/Oracle (Sun) EXAMINER BENGZON, GREG C
A prima facie case is established when the party with the burden of proof points to evidence that is sufficient, if uncontroverted, to entitle it to prevail as a matter of law. See Saab Cars USA, Inc. v. United States, 434 F.3rd 1359, 1369 (Fed. Cir 2006)
2892 Ex Parte Hoffman et al 10/799,961 MANTIS MERCADER 103(a) 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 112(2)/112(4) HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY EXAMINER KRAIG, WILLIAM F
A dependent claim in a patent that fails to “‘specify a further limitation of the subject matter’ of the [independent] claim to which [the dependent claim] refers” is invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 4. See Pfizer, Inc. v. Ranbaxy Labs., Ltd., 457 F.3d 1284, 1291-92 (Fed. Cir. 2006).
3623 Ex Parte Casco-Arias et al 10/439,570 KIM 103(a) MARCIA L. DOUBET LAW FIRM EXAMINER KARDOS, NEIL R
3718 Ex Parte Halliburton et al 10/777,770 STAICOVICI 103(a) VENABLE LLP EXAMINER PANDYA, SUNIT
3751 Ex Parte Helmetsie et al 10/774,339 SONG 102(b)/103(a) Carlson, Gaskey & Olds/Masco Corporation EXAMINER LE, HUYEN D
1764 Ex Parte Ahmed et al 11/862,475 TIMM 103(a) H.B. FULLER COMPANY EXAMINER LEE, DORIS L
2771 Ex Parte 6076094 et al Ex parte IO RESEARCH PTY. LIMITED, Appellant and Patent Owner 90/008,058 TURNER 103(a) PATENT OWNER: GREENBLUM & BERNSTEIN, P.L.C. THIRD PARTY REQUESTER: Richard Kim MORRISON & FOESTER LLP EXAMINER CHOI, WOO H original EXAMINER HO, RUAY L
3724 Ex Parte 7000325 et al Bunzl Processor Distribution LLC, Requester and Appellant, v. Patent of Bettcher Industries, Inc., Patent Owner and Respondent 95/001,130 ROBERTSON 103(a) PATENT OWNER: TAROLLI, SUNDHEIM, COVELL & TUMMINO L.L.P. THIRD-PARTY REQUESTER: CLYDE L. SMITH THOMPSON COBURN LLP EXAMINER WEHNER, CARY ELLEN original EXAMINER CHOI, STEPHEN
1651 Ex Parte 5741705 et al Ex parte KERRY GROUP, PLC Appellant 90/010,527 LEBOVITZ 103(a)/112(1)/305 FOR PATENT OWNER: IAN McLEOD FOR THIRD-PARTY REQUESTER: WEINGARTEN, SCHURGIN, GAGNEBIN & LEBOVICI, LLP EXAMINER PONNALURI, PADMASHRI original EXAMINER WARE, DEBORAH K
To decide whether a composition, device, or process would have been obvious in light of the prior art, it must be determined whether, at the time of invention, “a person of ordinary skill in the art would have had reason to attempt to make the composition or device, or carry out the claimed process, and would have had a reasonable expectation of success in doing so.” PharmaStem Therapeutics, Inc. v. ViaCell, Inc., 491 F.3d 1342, 1360 (Fed. Cir. 2007) (internal citations omitted).
1723 Ex Parte 7281842 et al Vita-Mix Corporation Requester v. K-TEC, Inc. Patent Owner 95/000,339 ROBERTSON 102(e)/102(b)/103(a) PATENT OWNER: HOLLAND & HART THIRD-PARTY REQUESTER: MCDONALD HOPKINS LLC EXAMINER STEIN, STEPHEN J original EXAMINER COOLEY, CHARLES E
1611 Ex Parte Kramer et al 10/981,663 MILLS 103(a) OBLON, SPIVAK, MCCLELLAND MAIER & NEUSTADT, L.L.P. EXAMINER LOVE, TREVOR M
1644 Ex Parte Ringler et al 10/118,600 ADAMS 103(a) McDermott Will & Emery EXAMINER SCHWADRON, RONALD B
1731 Ex Parte Strebelle 10/567,263 WARREN 103(a) OBLON, SPIVAK, MCCLELLAND MAIER & NEUSTADT, L.L.P. EXAMINER LORENGO, JERRY A
1762 Ex Parte Vandaele 11/498,336 WARREN 102(b)/103(a) FINA TECHNOLOGY INC EXAMINER CHEUNG, WILLIAM K
2121 Ex Parte Ahmed 10/353,110 SMITH 102(b)/103(a) Siemens Corporation EXAMINER JARRETT, RYAN A
2161 Ex Parte Aman et al 10/428,893 DANG 103(a) Richard Lau INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORPORATION EXAMINER PADMANABHAN, KAVITA
2169 Ex Parte Kwon 11/193,347 BLANKENSHIP 101/102(e) SUGHRUE MION, PLLC EXAMINER VO, CECILE H
2442 Ex Parte Murphy et al 10/408,365 SMITH 102(e)/103(a) MARSH FISCHMANN & BREYFOGLE LLP EXAMINER AILES, BENJAMIN A
2445 Ex Parte Li et al 10/025,790 MORGAN 103(a) David T. Nikaido RADER, FISHMAN & GRAUER, PLLC EXAMINER JOO, JOSHUA
2811 Ex Parte Forbes et al 10/225,605 ROBERTSON 103(a) SCHWEGMAN, LUNDBERG & WOESSNER, P.A. EXAMINER NADAV, ORI
3771 Ex Parte Eason et al 10/477,055 SCHAFER 103(a) Davidson Davidson & Kappel EXAMINER DEMILLE, DANTON D
Labels: pfizer , pharmastem , saab