§

Ex Parte 5827178 et al

90011308 (P.T.A.B. Jan. 4, 2019)
Ex Parte 5827178 et al

9 Cited authorities

  1. Phillips v. AWH Corp.

    415 F.3d 1303 (Fed. Cir. 2005)   Cited 5,828 times   167 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "because extrinsic evidence can help educate the court regarding the field of the invention and can help the court determine what a person of ordinary skill in the art would understand claim terms to mean, it is permissible for the district court in its sound discretion to admit and use such evidence"

  2. Leapfrog v. Fisher-Price

    485 F.3d 1157 (Fed. Cir. 2007)   Cited 90 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the objective considerations of nonobviousness presented, including substantial evidence of commercial success, praise, and long-felt need, were inadequate to overcome a strong showing of primary considerations that rendered the claims at issue invalid

  3. Biomet Orthopedics, LLC v. Puget Bioventures, LLC

    640 F. App'x 868 (Fed. Cir. 2016)   Cited 4 times

    2015-1468 01-14-2016 BIOMET ORTHOPEDICS, LLC, BIOMET MANUFACTURING, LLC, Appellants v. PUGET BIOVENTURES, LLC, FORMERLY HUDSON SURGICAL DESIGN, INC., Appellee DOUGLAS SALYERS, Troutman Sanders LLP, Atlanta, GA, argued for appellants. Also represented by PAUL E. MCGOWAN, DUSTIN B. WEEKS. BRAD PEDERSEN, Patterson Thuente Pedersen, P.A., Minneapolis, MN, argued for appellee. Also represented by CHAD J. WICKMAN. MOORE, Circuit Judge. NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential. Appeal from the United States

  4. Section 103 - Conditions for patentability; non-obvious subject matter

    35 U.S.C. § 103   Cited 6,130 times   479 Legal Analyses
    Holding the party seeking invalidity must prove "the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains."

  5. Section 306 - Appeal

    35 U.S.C. § 306   Cited 42 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Providing that a petitioner can appeal adverse decisions to the Federal Circuit after reexaminations are complete

  6. Section 134 - Incidental expenses of law library

    2 U.S.C. § 134

    The incidental expenses of the law library shall be paid out of the appropriations for the Library of Congress. 2 U.S.C. § 134 R.S. §83. EDITORIAL NOTES CODIFICATIONR.S. §83 derived from act July 14, 1832, ch. 221, §3, 4 Stat. 579.

  7. Section 41.50 - Decisions and other actions by the Board

    37 C.F.R. § 41.50   Cited 34 times   30 Legal Analyses
    Requiring petitioners to raise the Board's failure to designate a new ground of rejection in a timely request for rehearing

  8. Section 1.136 - Extensions of time

    37 C.F.R. § 1.136   Cited 17 times   30 Legal Analyses

    (a) (1) If an applicant is required to reply within a nonstatutory or shortened statutory time period, applicant may extend the time period for reply up to the earlier of the expiration of any maximum period set by statute or five months after the time period set for reply, if a petition for an extension of time and the fee set in § 1.17(a) are filed, unless: (i) Applicant is notified otherwise in an Office action; (ii) The reply is a reply brief submitted pursuant to § 41.41 of this title; (iii)

  9. Section 41.33 - Amendments and affidavits or other Evidence after appeal

    37 C.F.R. § 41.33   Cited 2 times   1 Legal Analyses

    (a) Amendments filed after the date of filing an appeal pursuant to § 41.31(a)(1) through (a)(3) and prior to the date a brief is filed pursuant to § 41.37 may be admitted as provided in § 1.116 of this title. (b) Amendments filed on or after the date of filing a brief pursuant to § 41.37 may be admitted: (1) To cancel claims, where such cancellation does not affect the scope of any other pending claim in the proceeding, or (2) To rewrite dependent claims into independent form. (c) All other amendments