A rejection for obviousness must include “some articulated reasoning with some rational underpinning to support the legal conclusion.” KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 418 (2007) (quoting In re
Read more
On July 10, 2020, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) reversed the Examiner’s anticipation and obviousness rejections in Ex parte Loveless. The rejections were based on the Examiner’s construction of certain claim limitations as relating to an intended use, rather than being structural
Read more
Ex parte Bobrowski is a 2008 decision of the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (BPAI) that is listed among the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s
Read more
On June 30, 2020, the Federal Circuit issued a decision in Pacific Coast Building v. Certainteed Gypsum, Inc. (nonprecedential) agreeing with the District Court that patentee’s own term
Read more
On May 13, 2020, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) issued a decision in Ex parte Ismagilov reversing an Examiner’s rejection of original claims for
Read more
Obviousness-type double patenting (“ODP”) is a judicially-created doctrine designed to prevent a party from extending its right to exclude by enforcing claims in a later-filed patent that are
Read more
During patent examination, examiners must give claim terms “their broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification.” MPEP 2111. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) emphasized
Read more
On June 9, 2020, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) ­reversed the Examiner’s obviousness rejections in Ex parte Leibold. The obviousness rejections were based on
Read more
Ex parte Batteux is a 2007 decision of the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (BPAI) that is listed among the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s
Read more
Under the doctrine of “claim preclusion” (res judicata), a judgment on the merits in a prior suit bars a second suit involving the same parties or
Read more