Legal Opinion
In Re Sujeet Kumar
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Decided August 15, 2005No. 2004-1074PublishedCited by 26 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
PAULINE NEWMAN, Circuit Judge.
Sujeet Kumar, Hariklia Dris Reitz, Xi-angxin Bi and Nobuyuki Kambe (together “Kumar”) appeal the decision of the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences of the Patent and Trademark Office, rejecting claims 1-3, 5-16, and 19-22 of patent application Serial No. 09/136,483 entitled “Aluminum Oxide Particles” as obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103. We vacate the Board’s decision and remand for further proceedings.
BACKGROUND
The claims of Kumar’s patent application are directed to aluminum oxide particles of submicron (nanometer) size, 1 having a specified size range and…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Consolidated Edison Co. v. National Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Graham v. John Deere Co. of Kansas CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Dickinson v. ZurkoSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
- Dickinson v. ZurkoSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
- In Re Robert J. Gartside and Richard C. NortonCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2000
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by26 opinions
- Power-One, Inc. v. Artesyn Technologies, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2010
- In Re Huai-Hung KaoCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2011
- Wi-Lan, Inc. v. Apple Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2016
- In Re Translogic Technology, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2007
- In Re: Nuvasive, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2016
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.