Principle of Operation Arguments
Last week, we briefed In re Ratti. 270 F.2d 810, 813, 123 USPQ 349, 352 (CCPA 1959); MPEP 2143.01 VI. Ratti clarifies that a secondary… Read More »Principle of Operation Arguments
Obviousness
On In re Ratti
We recently considered arguments directed to rendering the prior art inoperable. A related conclusion, articulated In re Ratti, clarifies that a secondary reference cannot modify… Read More »On In re Ratti
Inefficient Obviousness Arguments
Last week, we discussed the difficulty of demonstrating that an Examiner’s proposed modification would render the prior art inoperable for its intended purpose. Accordingly, Applicants… Read More »Inefficient Obviousness Arguments
Avoid Rendering an Unsatisfactory Argument
Patent applicants, especially those familiar with the patent laws of non-US jurisdictions, sometimes find it difficult to accept how US Examiners can combine prior art… Read More »Avoid Rendering an Unsatisfactory Argument
Design Choice
I remember some treatise (Chisum?) making the point that an Examiner can find almost any combination of elements at a low-level of granularity. Thus, in… Read More »Design Choice
Single-Reference Obviousness Rejections
We previously discussed “broadest reasonable interpretation” claim construction as featured in, but distinct from, obviousness rejections. Let’s consider one uncommon situation that clarifies this distinction.… Read More »Single-Reference Obviousness Rejections
- « Previous
- 1
- 2