Ex Parte Penner et al

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Jan 24, 2019

13432514 (P.T.A.B. Jan. 24, 2019)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
13/432,514 03/28/2012 Benjamin Warren Penner
63796 7590 02/01/2019
DINSMORE & SHOHL LLP
900 Wilshire Drive
Suite 300
TROY, MI 48084
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
www .uspto.gov
ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
TTCll-21602/08 3057
EXAMINER
SA WDON, ALICIA JANE
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
1781
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
02/01/2019 ELECTRONIC
Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
following e-mail address(es):
MichiganPatTM@dinsmore.com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte BENJAMIN WARREN PENNER and
KERRY SCOTT ZELLNER JR.
Appeal2017-002660
Application 13/432,514
Technology Center 1700
Before ROMULO H. DELMENDO, LINDA M. GAUDETTE, and
MICHAEL P. COLAIANNI, Administrative Patent Judges.
COLAIANNI, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
Appeal2017-002660
Application 13/432,514
Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the non-final rejection
of claims 1--4, 6, 7, 11, 12, 14, and 21. Claims 15-20 have been withdrawn
as directed to a non-elected invention (App. Br. 2). Claim 21 is not twice
rejected, but the Appellants have been denied a patent at least twice. 35
U.S.C. § 134(a). SeealsoExparteLemoine,46USPQ2d 1420, 1423 (BPAI
1994) ("Under our interpretation [of35 U.S.C. § 134], so long as the
applicant has twice been denied a patent, an appeal may be filed.").
Therefore, we have jurisdiction over the appeal of claims 1--4, 6, 7, 11, 12,
14, and 21 pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). Oral arguments were heard in this
appeal on January 17, 2019.
We AFFIRM.
Appellants' invention is directed to an injection molded polymer
substrate with a groove that has a