Ex parte Rodriguez

Case Number: CLB0307

Date: 10.01.2009

Citation: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (precedential opinion)

The absence of the term “means for” in a claim does not necessarily mean that 35 U.S.C. § 112 (6) doesn’t apply, but rather triggers a rebuttable presumption.

Download PDF Return to Case Law Briefs Main Page