Monday, April 22, 2013

Appellant loses in Ex parte BASF (Stueven )

From within the decision Ex parte BASF:

At page 10, the Board recommends that the language of claim 1 be clarified "consistent with our understanding."

At page 11, Ex parte Braeken, 54 USPQ2d 1110 (BPAI 1999) , is cited.

At page 14, Sakraida, 425 US 273, 282 is cited.

At page 15, the matter of "unexpected results" is discussed with citation to In re Klosak 455 F.2d 1077, 1080 (CCPA 1972)and
to McClain v. Ortmayer, 141 US 419, 319 (1891). In this case, the appellant's assertion of unexpected results fails.

At page 18, Antor Media is cited.

The appellant, represented by Marshall, Gerstein, lost.

As one footnote, non-prior art Issberner 1 (in English), which was an "equivalent" of Issberner 2 (in German), was used by the Board.

Reference: 12/438,835


Post a Comment

<< Home