{"id":636,"date":"2016-03-09T09:11:06","date_gmt":"2016-03-09T14:11:06","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/?p=636"},"modified":"2016-03-24T09:17:48","modified_gmt":"2016-03-24T13:17:48","slug":"if-you-cant-say-something-nice","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/?p=636","title":{"rendered":"If You Can’t Say Something Nice . . ."},"content":{"rendered":"

In Bamberg v. Dalvey<\/em>, [2015-1548] (March 9, 2016), the Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB\u2019s decision in an appeal from a consolidated interference proceeding refusing to allow the claims of four patent applications because the specification failed to meet the written description requirement of 35 U.S.C. \u00a7 112.\u00a0 The involved claims disclose a method for the transfer of printed images onto dark colored textiles by ironing over a specialty transfer paper. The transfer paper generally contains: (1) a removable substrate coated with silicon, (2) a hot-melt adhesive, (3) a white layer, and (4) an ink-receptive layer.\u00a0 During the interference proceeding, Dalvey alleged that Bamberg\u2019s claims were unpatentable for lack of written description, because the claims recite a\u00a0white layer that melts at a wide range of temperatures, while Bamberg\u2019s specification discloses a white layer that does not melt at ironing temperatures (i.e., below 220\u00b0C).<\/p>\n

The Federal Circuit agreed that the contested claims are properly construed to encompass a white\u00a0layer that melts above and below 220\u00b0C, and thus Bamberg\u2019s specification must also support a white layer that melts above and below 220\u00b0C to satisfy the written description requirement. \u00a0The Federal Circuit concluded that substantial evidence supports the Board\u2019s determination that Bamberg\u2019s specification fails to meet\u00a0the written description requirement.\u00a0 Bamberg\u2019s specification stated that the white layer \u201ccomprises or is composed of permanently elastic plastics which are non-fusible at ironing temperatures (i.e. up to about 220\u00b0C) and which are filled with white pigments\u2014also non-fusible (up to about 220\u00b0C),\u201d and that the \u201celastic\u00a0plastics must not melt at ironing temperatures in order not to provide with the adhesive layer . . . an undesired\u00a0mixture with impaired (adhesive and covering) properties.\u201d\u00a0 The Federal Circuit found that Bamberg\u00a0did\u00a0not possess a white layer that melts below 220\u00b0C because it specifically distinguished white layers that\u00a0melt below 220\u00b0C as producing an \u201cundesired\u201d result.\u00a0 This criticism effectively limited the scope of the disclosure.<\/p>\n

In patents, as in life, Mom was right: \u00a0If you can’t say something nice about the prior art, don’t say anything at all. \u00a0Otherwise, your criticism may be treated as a disclaimer of claim scope.<\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

In Bamberg v. Dalvey, [2015-1548] (March 9, 2016), the Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB\u2019s decision in an appeal from a consolidated interference proceeding refusing to allow the claims of four patent applications because the specification failed to meet the written … 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":[5,13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-636","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-drafting-tips","category-patent-prosecution"],"post_mailing_queue_ids":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/636","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=636"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/636\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":638,"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/636\/revisions\/638"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=636"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=636"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=636"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}