Patent claims often recite structural limitations in combination with one or more properties. For example, a product claim might recite a composition comprising three components, where one of the components is specified as having certain physical properties. In such cases, U.S. patent examiners often reject the claims as either anticipated or obvious based on prior art describing the structural limitations but not describing the properties.
Ex parte Maeda is a 2009 decision of the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (BPAI) that is listed among the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB) informative decisions. Ex parte Maeda is indicated by the PTAB to be informative as to “proof properties are not inherent.”
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 (PTAB) informative decisions. Ex parte Batteux is indicated by the PTAB to be informative as to “[a]nticipation – intended treatment.”
