The above-entitled matter came on for hearing on Tuesday, June 5, 2018, commencing at 1:19 p.m., at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Madison Building, 600 Dulany Street, Alexandria, Virginia 22314.
JUDGE GOODSON: Are you aware of any authority, apart from the federal circuit case that was cited in our institution decision, that addresses the effect of a restriction requirement on the main scopes?
Petitioner's obvious objections are all predicated on the (inaudible) assumption that a skilled artisan could have achieved a rotational power distribution and control system -- I'm sorry, I'm on slide 14.
There's no -- there's simply no nexus to the claim language, no commercial success, long failed unsolved needs, failure of others ... there was reference to a press release by the Patent Owner, but nothing beyond that.
When Caterpillar threatened to file the IPR petition, it was in a hearing in federal court in Fargo, and my husband's statement was that he looked forward to that because the outcome of that, he felt, he was sure would be the validity and strength of his patent.