§

Ex parte SENN et al.

08314471 (B.P.A.I. Feb. 28, 2000)
Ex parte SENN et al.

4 Cited authorities

  1. Application of Ehrreich

    590 F.2d 902 (C.C.P.A. 1979)   Cited 15 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Reversing patent office's rejection of plaintiff's patent as obvious

  2. In re Duva

    387 F.2d 402 (C.C.P.A. 1967)   Cited 1 times

    Patent Appeal No. 7833. December 14, 1967. Greene, Callmann Durr, Frank L. Durr, New York City, Stanley H. Leiberstein, Nutley, N.J., for appellant. Joseph Schimmel, Washington, D.C. (Raymond E. Martin, Washington, D.C., of counsel), for the Commissioner of Patents. Before WORLEY, Chief Judge, RICH, SMITH and ALMOND, Associate Judges, and WILLIAM H. KIRKPATRICK. Senior District Judge, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, sitting by designation. SMITH, Judge. The sole issue to be determined in this appeal

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

    35 U.S.C. § 103   Cited 6,172 times   492 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."

  4. Section 134 - Appeal to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board

    35 U.S.C. § 134   Cited 99 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