{"id":2893,"date":"2020-08-01T04:12:54","date_gmt":"2020-08-01T09:12:54","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/?p=2893"},"modified":"2020-08-23T23:16:42","modified_gmt":"2020-08-24T04:16:42","slug":"federal-circuit-to-ptab-show-your-work","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/?p=2893","title":{"rendered":"Federal Circuit to PTAB: Show Your Work"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

In Alacritech, Inc., v. Intel<\/a>, [2019-1467, 2019-1468] (July 31, 2020) the Federal Circuit vacated the Board\u2019s obviousness determination as to claims 41\u201343 of U.S. Patent No. 8,131,880\u00a0 because the Board did not adequately support its finding that the asserted prior art combination teaches or suggests a limitation recited in claims, and remanded for further proceedings regarding those claims.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The \u2019880 patent relates to computer networking, and is specifically directed to offloading certain network-related processing tasks from a host computer\u2019s central processing unit (CPU) to an \u201cintelligent network interface card\u201d (INIC). According to the \u2019880 patent, one of the tasks that can be offloaded from the CPU to the INIC is the reassembly of data from packets received by the host computer from the network.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Federal Circuit said that to support Federal Circuit review, the Board is obligated to provide an administrative record showing the evidence on which the findings are based, accompanied by the agency\u2019s reasoning in reaching its conclusions.\u00a0 The Federal Circuit said that it does not require perfect explanations, and it will uphold a decision of less than ideal clarity if the agency\u2019s path may reasonably be discerned.\u00a0 However, the Federal Circuit found that the Board\u2019s analysis of the disclosure of the reassembly limitations in claims 41\u201343 falls short of that which the APA and our precedent require.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Federal Circuit found that the Board\u2019s analysis did not acknowledge the parties\u2019 dispute over where the reassembly occurs, much less explain how the prior art teaches or suggests reassembly in the network interface. As such, the Federal Circuit said that it could not reasonably discern whether the Board followed a proper path in determining that the asserted prior art teaches or suggests the reassembly limitations, and by extension, that the subject matter of claims 41\u201343 would have been obvious.\u00a0 The Federal Circuit further noted that because the Board\u2019s reasoning appears to be untethered to either party\u2019s position, it could not infer that the Board\u2019s obviousness determinations flowed directly from its rejection of the patent owner\u2019s arguments, or adoption of the Petitioner\u2019s arguments.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Federal Circuit vacated the Board\u2019s obviousness determination as to claims 41\u201343 and remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. \u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

In Alacritech, Inc., v. Intel, [2019-1467, 2019-1468] (July 31, 2020) the Federal Circuit vacated the Board\u2019s obviousness determination as to claims 41\u201343 of U.S. Patent No. 8,131,880\u00a0 because the Board did not adequately support its finding that the asserted prior … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2893","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-ipr"],"post_mailing_queue_ids":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2893","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=2893"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2893\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2894,"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2893\/revisions\/2894"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=2893"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=2893"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=2893"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}