Ex Parte Raymond et al

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Aug 22, 2014

11531585 (P.T.A.B. Aug. 22, 2014)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARKOFFICE
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
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
11/531,585 09/13/2006 Megan N. Raymond 1410-77443-US 1449
48940 7590 08/22/2014
FITCH EVEN TABIN & FLANNERY, LLP
120 SOUTH LASALLE STREET
SUITE 1600
CHICAGO, IL 60603-3406
EXAMINER
THAKUR, VIREN A
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
1792
MAIL DATE DELIVERY MODE
08/22/2014 PAPER
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.
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________

BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
____________

Ex parte MEGAN N. RAYMOND, ARTHUR C. TEASDALE,
CHRISTINE LOUISE KWIAT, KEITH DANIEL FORNECK,
YA-YU PAI, and RENEE GAN
____________

Appeal 2012-0106211
Application 11/531,5852
Technology Center 1700
____________

Before BRADLEY R. GARRIS, ROMULO H. DELMENDO, and
GEORGE C. BEST, Administrative Patent Judges.

DELMENDO, Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL
The Appellants seek our review under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) of a final
rejection of 1-23. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6.
We summarily affirm the Examiner’s rejections under (i) 35 U.S.C.
§ 112, ¶ 1 (lack of written description), of claims 1-19, 21, and 22, (ii) 35

1 The current appeal is related to an appeal in Application 11/531,592
(Appeal 2012-010181), which is being decided concurrently. Appeal Brief
filed February 9, 2012 (“App. Br.”) 4.
2 According to the Appellants, the real party in interest is Kraft Foods Global
Brands, LLC. App.Br. 3.
Appeal 2012-010621
Application 11/531,585

2
U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 2, of claims 1-19, and (iii) double patenting grounds of
claims 1, 4, 16-21, and 23,3 because the Appellants offer no arguments
against these rejections. App. Br. 18 n.3, 19 n.4, and 19-37; Reply Brief
filed June 27, 2012 at 1-9. Hyatt v. Dudas, 551 F.3d 1307, 1314 (Fed. Cir.
2008) (explaining that summary affirmance without consideration of the
substantive merits is appropriate where an appellant fails to contest a ground
of rejection).
On the substantive merits, we affirm the Examiner’s rejections under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a) of claims 1-23 for the reasons well-stated in the Answer
at pages 9-40 and 43-60.
The Examiner’s final decision to reject claims 1-23 is affirmed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a)(1).
AFFIRMED

cam

3 Examiner’s Answer entered April 27, 2012 at 7-8 and 34-37.