§

Ex Parte Opgenoorth et al

11516908 (P.T.A.B. Jan. 15, 2013)
Ex Parte Opgenoorth et al

7 Cited authorities

  1. Union Marine Ins. Co. v. Charles D. Stone Co.

    15 F.2d 937 (7th Cir. 1926)   Cited 9 times

    No. 3730. December 1, 1926. In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Eastern Division of the Northern District of Illinois. Action by Charles D. Stone Co. against the Union Marine Insurance Company, removed from the municipal court of the city of Chicago. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant brings error. Reversed and remanded, with directions. A.C. Wetterstorm, of Chicago, Ill., for plaintiff in error. Charles E. Kremer, of Chicago, Ill., for defendant in error. Before ALSCHULER

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

    35 U.S.C. § 103   Cited 6,159 times   489 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 112 - Certain combat zone compensation of members of the Armed Forces

    26 U.S.C. § 112   Cited 622 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Relating to liquidations beginning prior to January 1, 1936

  4. Section 6 - Patent Trial and Appeal Board

    35 U.S.C. § 6   Cited 188 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"

  5. 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

  6. Section 41.37 - Appeal brief

    37 C.F.R. § 41.37   Cited 32 times   25 Legal Analyses
    Requiring identification of support in specification and, for means-plus-function limitations, corresponding structure as well

  7. Section 1.136 - [Effective until 1/19/2025] 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)