Ex Parte Kociak et al

4 Cited authorities

  1. In re Bertsch

    132 F.2d 1014 (C.C.P.A. 1943)   Cited 8 times

    Patent Appeal No. 4672. December 26, 1942. Rehearing Denied January 29, 1943. Appeal from the Board of Appeals of the United States Patent Office, Serial No. 275,700. Proceedings in the matter of the application of Heinrich Bertsch for a patent. From a decision of the Board of Appeals of the United States Patent Office affirming a decision of the primary examiner rejecting the application, the applicant appeals. Affirmed. Hammond Littell, of New York City (Charles P. Pollard, of New York City, of

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

    35 U.S.C. § 103   Cited 6,063 times   460 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."
  3. Section 6 - Patent Trial and Appeal Board

    35 U.S.C. § 6   Cited 182 times   63 Legal Analyses
    Giving the Director authority to designate "at least 3 members of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board" to review "[e]ach appeal, derivation proceeding, post-grant review, and inter partes review"
  4. Section 134 - Appeal to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board

    35 U.S.C. § 134   Cited 98 times   30 Legal Analyses

    (a) PATENT APPLICANT.-An applicant for a patent, any of whose claims has been twice rejected, may appeal from the decision of the primary examiner to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, having once paid the fee for such appeal. (b) PATENT OWNER.-A patent owner in a reexamination may appeal from the final rejection of any claim by the primary examiner to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, having once paid the fee for such appeal. 35 U.S.C. § 134 July 19, 1952, ch. 950, 66 Stat. 801; Pub. L. 98-622