T
A. Overview of Preliminary Motions .................................... 22
B. Zhou Preliminary Motion 1 Fails to Demonstrate that Keagy's Corresponding
Claims are Anticipated or Rendered Obvious by the Prior Art .............. 23
1 Chen '649 Is Not "Prior Art" to Keagy's Corresponding Claims ...... 23
2. Sibbald '586 and Cobb '083 Do Not Render Keagy's Corresponding
C laim s O bvious ............................................ 27
C. Zhou Preliminary Motion 2 Fails to Show that Keagy's Corresponding Claims
Lack Sufficient Description and/or are Indefinite ........................ 29
1 . Keagy's Corresponding Claims are Definite ...................... 30
2. Zhou has Failed to Prove that Keagy's Corresponding Claims Lack
Adequate W ritten Description ................................. 32
a. Keagy's Corresponding Claims are Supported by Keagy's
Specification ........................................ 34
b. The '098 Prosecution History Does Not Necessarily Limit Keagy's
Written Description for Keagy's Corresponding Claims . ...... 36
D. Zhou Preliminary Motion 3 to Deny Priority Benefit of Earlier Keagy
A pplications ..................................................... 38
E. Zhou Preliminary Motion 4 to Designate Zhou Claims 14-17 and 28 as Not
Corresponding to Count I .......................................... 39
F. Kcagy Preliminary Motion I to Designate Zhou Claims I I - 13 as corresponding to
C o un t I ...... ..... ...... ...... ..... ....... ..... ...... ...... ... ..4 3
G. Priority of Invention is Awarded Against Junior Party Zhou ............... 46
W . O rder ................................................................ 46
A PPE N D IX A ............................................................... 49
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007