Patent opinions from the Eastern District of Texas and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Weekly Digest
Fed. Cir.

In re TAN, No. 08-1421 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 3, 2009)

Affirmed
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 08-1421
Decided
April 3, 2009
Judge
Per curiam (Rule 36)
Document
Rule 36 Judgment
Length
2 pages

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

2008-1421

(Re-examination No. 90/006,696)

IN RE PENG TAN

David Fink, Fink & Johnson, of Houston, Texas, argued for appellant. William LaMarca, Associate Solicitor, Office of the Solicitor, United States Patent and Trademark Office, of Alexandria, Virginia, argued for the Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office. With him on the brief were Raymond T. Chen, Solicitor, and Nathan K. Kelley, Associate Solicitor. Appealed from: United States Patent and Trademark Office Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

2United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 2008-1421 (Re-examination No. 90/006, 696) .

IN RE PENG TAN

Judgment ON APPEAL from the UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE, BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS AND INTERFERENCES

This CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

Per Curiam (LOURIE, RADER, and DYK, Circuit Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36. ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

DATED April 3, 2009 /s/ Jan Horbaly____________________ Jan Horbaly, Clerk

Text extracted from the official PDF and reflowed for reading. It is not a certified transcript — the PDF linked above is the authoritative document.

Analysis is coming soon.

A plain-English account of the issues, facts and holding, written by Patent Case Watch. The opinion itself — its full text, its PDF and everything else on this page — stays free to read for everyone, always.

Cite this opinion

In re TAN, No. 08-1421 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 3, 2009).

Record ID
CAFC-08-1421-20090403
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/CAFC-08-1421-20090403

No reporter citation is shown because the official source does not supply one; none is inferred here. Check the opinion and a citator before relying on this form.