§

The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company

15665532 - (D) (P.T.A.B. Jun. 30, 2020)
The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company

9 Cited authorities

  1. In re Wands

    858 F.2d 731 (Fed. Cir. 1988)   Cited 339 times   43 Legal Analyses
    Holding that whether undue experimentation is required is a "conclusion reached by weighing many factual considerations. . . . includ[ing] the quantity of experimentation necessary, the amount of direction or guidance presented, the presence or absence of working examples, the nature of the invention, the state of the prior art, the relative skill of those in the art, the predictability or unpredictability of the art, and the breadth of the claims."

  2. Streck, Inc. v. Research & Diagnostic Sys., Inc.

    665 F.3d 1269 (Fed. Cir. 2012)   Cited 136 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that district court lacked jurisdiction over claims that were asserted in the complaint but not in the plaintiff's infringement contentions or defendant's invalidity contentions

  3. Alza Corp. v. Andrx Pharmaceuticals, LLC

    603 F.3d 935 (Fed. Cir. 2010)   Cited 107 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Finding claims were not enabled because relevant field "was not mature" and the claimed dosage was considered a "'breakaway' from the prior art"

  4. In re Hillis

    484 F. App'x 491 (Fed. Cir. 2012)

    Serial No. 11/386,211 2011-1401 Serial No. 11/386,227 2011-1402 05-21-2012 IN RE W. DANIEL HILLIS, RODERICK A. HYDE, NATHAN P. MYHRVOLD, CLARENCE T. TEGREENE, and LOWELL L. WOOD, JR. MANU J. TEJWANI, Intellectual Ventures, LLC, of Bellevue, Washington, for appellants. Of counsel was ROY P. DIAZ. RAYMOND T. CHEN, Solicitor, United States Patent & Trademark Office, of Alexandria, Virginia, for appellee. With him on the brief were NATHAN K. KELLEY and LYNNE E. PETTIGREW, Associate Solicitors. PER CURIAM

  5. Section 112 - Specification

    35 U.S.C. § 112   Cited 7,350 times   1045 Legal Analyses
    Requiring patent applications to include a "specification" that provides, among other information, a written description of the invention and of the manner and process of making and using it

  6. Section 6 - Patent Trial and Appeal Board

    35 U.S.C. § 6   Cited 186 times   63 Legal Analyses
    Giving the Director authority to designate "at least 3 members of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board" to review "[e]ach appeal, derivation proceeding, post-grant review, and inter partes review"

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

    35 U.S.C. § 134   Cited 98 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

  8. Section 1.136 - Extensions of time

    37 C.F.R. § 1.136   Cited 17 times   30 Legal Analyses

    (a) (1) If an applicant is required to reply within a nonstatutory or shortened statutory time period, applicant may extend the time period for reply up to the earlier of the expiration of any maximum period set by statute or five months after the time period set for reply, if a petition for an extension of time and the fee set in § 1.17(a) are filed, unless: (i) Applicant is notified otherwise in an Office action; (ii) The reply is a reply brief submitted pursuant to § 41.41 of this title; (iii)

  9. Section 1.42 - Applicant for patent

    37 C.F.R. § 1.42   1 Legal Analyses

    (a) The word "applicant" when used in this title refers to the inventor or all of the joint inventors, or to the person applying for a patent as provided in §§ 1.43 , 1.45 , or 1.46 . (b) If a person is applying for a patent as provided in § 1.46 , the word "applicant" refers to the assignee, the person to whom the inventor is under an obligation to assign the invention, or the person who otherwise shows sufficient proprietary interest in the matter, who is applying for a patent under § 1.46 and