Within Ex parte Cho the PTAB decides the issues before it, but makes suggestions in footnote 2
Footnote 2 of Ex parte Cho is of interest.
posted by Lawrence B. Ebert at 1:26 PM
Friday, August 09, 2013
About Me
- Name: Lawrence B. Ebert
I'm a patent lawyer located in central New Jersey. I have a J.D. from the University of Chicago and a Ph.D. from Stanford University, where I studied graphite intercalation compounds at the Center for Materials Research. I worked at Exxon Corporate Research in areas ranging from engine deposits through coal and petroleum to fullerenes. An article that I wrote in The Trademark Reporter, 1994, 84, 379-407 on color trademarks was cited by Supreme Court in Qualitex v. Jacobson, 514 US 159 (1995) and the methodology was adopted in the Capri case in N.D. Ill. An article that I wrote on DNA profiling was cited by the Colorado Supreme Court (Shreck case) and a Florida appellate court (Brim case). I was interviewed by NHK-TV about the Jan-Hendrik Schon affair. I am developing ipABC, an entity that combines rigorous IP analytics with study of business models, to optimize utilization of intellectual property. I can be reached at C8AsF5 at yahoo.com.
Previous Posts
- Examiner reversed in Ex parte FILLATTI
- Appellant loses in Talanis case; US v. Adams cited.
- Appellant wins reversal in Ex parte Harris but fac...
- Katie Fehrenbacher on KiOR
- CAFC discusses criteria for preliminary injunction...
- CAFC outcome in Taurus/Orion/Spangenberg v. Daimle...
- Mixed result on obviousness in Ex parte Hantler
- Appellants in Oehlerking win on 101, but lose on 103
- PTAB discusses Bilski, 35 USC 101 in Ex parte Maca...
- Rembrandt v. Johnson & Johnson
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home