No. 18-1072
James J. Macor v. United States Patent and Trademark Office
Response Waived
Tags: 35-usc-102 35-usc-103 administrative-law analogous-art obviousness obviousness-standard patent patent-examination patent-law prior-art statutory-interpretation
Key Terms:
Patent Trademark
Patent Trademark
Latest Conference:
2019-04-12
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the standard for determining if prior art is 'analogous' in making rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious, and whether a finding of non-analogous prior art renders such a rejection void
Question Presented (from Petition)
QUESTION PRESENTED In making rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious, what standard should be applied in determining whether prior art is “analogous,” and, if the prior art is demonstrated to be non-analogous, does that render any such rejection void?
Docket Entries
2019-04-15
Petition DENIED.
2019-03-27
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/12/2019.
2019-03-18
Waiver of right of respondent U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to respond filed.
2019-02-11
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due March 18, 2019)
Attorneys
James Macor
Perry Matthew Fonseca — Law Office of Perry M. Fonseca, PC, Petitioner
Perry Matthew Fonseca — Law Office of Perry M. Fonseca, PC, Petitioner
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent