Ex Parte KOPPOLU et al - Page 20




                  Appeal No. 2005-1431                                                                                                                         
                  Application 09/442,070                                                                                                                       

                  it is entitled to judicial notice as an official interpretation of statutes or regulations as long as it is                                  
                  not in conflict therewith.") (citing Litton Sys., Inc. v. Whirlpool Corp., 728 F.2d 1423, 1439,                                              
                  221 USPQ 97, 107 (Fed. Cir. 1984)), and more particularly with the requirements of 35 U.S.C.                                                 
                  § 112, first paragraph,.  We begin by noting that in General Electric, the D.C. Circuit addressed                                            
                  the question of                                                                                                                              
                            [w]hether the Commissioner of Patents has the authority, under the                                                                 
                            applicable statutes and regulations, to issue a patent upon an application                                                         
                            which incorporates, by reference, in its disclosure, substantial portions of                                                       
                            a disclosure of an existing patent?  If he does have such power, to what                                                           
                            extent may "incorporation by reference" be permitted?                                                                              
                  407 F.2d at 1261, 159 USPQ at 337.  The court held:                                                                                          
                                     The duty to superintend the issuance of patents resides in the                                                            
                            Commissioner by statute.  In exercising those duties the Commissioner is                                                           
                            given wide discretion based upon his experience and expertise and the                                                              
                            courts should not disturb his rulings unless a clear abuse of that discretion                                                      
                            is manifest.  However, the question before this Court arises not out of an                                                         
                            abuse of discretion but upon the limits of discretion.  In that regard, we                                                         
                            hold that the Commissioner has the authority to issue a patent upon an                                                             
                            application wherein the disclosure incorporates, by reference, (and relies                                                         
                            thereon) certain portions of a disclosure of an existing patent provided that                                                      
                            this information relied upon is available to the public.                                                                           
                  Id. at 1262, 159 USPQ at 338 (footnote omitted; emphasis added).  The court did not elaborate                                                
                  on its language "incorporates, by reference (and relies thereon) certain portions of a                                                       
                  disclosure."26                                                                                                                               

                                                                                                                                                              
                            26   The court further held that an incorporation by reference which satisfies the                                                 
                  requirements of  35 U.S.C. § 112 will necessarily satisfy the requirements of 35 U.S.C. § 154,                                               
                  which read:                                                                                                                                  
                            35 U.S.C. § 154 (1964).  Contents and term of patent.                                                                              
                  (Continued on next page.)                                                                                                                    
                                                                             20                                                                                





Page:  Previous  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007