Decision of the PTO and the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (Board) rejecting claims in petitioner’s application to reissue a patent, involving a device for maintaining hot food, is reversed and remanded where: 1) anticipation cannot be found, as a matter of law, if any claimed element or limitation is not present in the reference; 2) Board was incorrect in holding that a claim was indefinite and a written description requirement was not met as such conclusion was unsupported by substantial evidence.
Read In re Skvorecz, No. 08-1221
Appellate Information
Appeal from: United States Patent and Trademark Office, Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences
Decided September 3, 2009
Judges
Before Newman, Friedman, and Mayer, CIrcuit Judges. Opinion by Newman, Circuit Judge.
Counsel
For Appellant: Baker & Hostetler LLP
You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help
Civil Rights
Block on Trump’s Asylum Ban Upheld by Supreme Court
Criminal
Judges Can Release Secret Grand Jury Records
Politicians Can’t Block Voters on Facebook, Court Rules
