Check them out here.

Ex Parte Olson, Appeal 2017-006489 (PTAB Mar. 25, 2019)

The claims at issue recite a method of registering a catheter navigation system to a three-dimensional image. This decision reverses the rejection by the examiner under 35 U.S.C. § 101. The Board concluded that the claims recite a judicial exception, a mathematical concept, but that the claims recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.

Ex Parte Kimizuka, Appeal 2018-001081 (PTAB May 15, 2019)

The claims at issue recite a method for fitting a golf club. This decision affirms the rejection of the claims under 35 U.S.C. § 101. The Board concluded that the claims recite a judicial exception, a mental process, and determined that the claims do not integrate the exception into a practical application or provide an inventive concept.

Ex Parte Savescu, Appeal 2018-003174 (PTAB Apr. 1, 2019)

The claims at issue recite a method for creating a life cycle workflow for a project. This decision affirms the rejection of the claims under 35 U.S.C. § 101. The Board concluded that the claims recite a judicial exception, a method of organizing human activity, and determined that the claims do not integrate the exception into a practical application or provide an inventive concept.

Ex Parte Fautz, Appeal 2019-000106 (PTAB May 15, 2019)

The claims at issue recite a magnetic resonance tomography apparatus. This decision reverses the rejection by the examiner under 35 U.S.C. § 101. The Board concluded that the claims recite a judicial exception, a mathematical concept, but that the claims recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.