Ex Parte Nakayama et al
4 Cited authorities
Typhoon Touch Technologies v. Dell, Inc.
659 F.3d 1376 (Fed. Cir. 2011) Cited 202 timesHolding that a patent applicant narrowed its application in a response to the examiner's rejection on prior art grounds
Microprocessor Enhancement Corp. v. Texas Instruments Inc.
520 F.3d 1367 (Fed. Cir. 2008) Cited 212 times 2 Legal AnalysesHolding that, while there is a presumption that a claim term will be construed consistently when used throughout the claims, there is no requirement that a claim term be construed uniformly, particularly if it would lead to a “nonsensical reading”
Section 6 - Patent Trial and Appeal Board
35 U.S.C. § 6 Cited 182 times 63 Legal AnalysesGiving 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"
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