The PTAB does not take kindly to attacks on the Examiner’s technical skill level.

Read about two sides of the analogous art coin.

Enjoy some social media stories courtesy of Facebook and the PTAB

Examiner speculation, if present, can be a weak point of a rejection on appeal, as illustrated in a recent PTAB decision.

A new informative decision on Section 101 shows how an invention using a neural network is patentable under Section 101 and the most recent USPTO guidelines on subject matter eligibility.

United Technologies tackles Section 112 rejections relating to enablement and possession regarding a claim limitation for an open-ended gear ratio.

If the prior art already addresses the motivation to combine, you have a hindsight-based rejection.

Why patent applications sometimes includes things those skilled in the art my think have nothing to do with the “invention.”

The PTAB uses the specification’s explanation of technical issues addressed by the invention to find that the claims overcome Section 101 by integrating an abstract idea into a practical application under the USPTO’s Revised Eligibility Guidelines.

If you allege an examiner is using advantages from the specification, make sure you cite to specification for support.