I am always impressed when I listen to recordings of Tom Krause arguing before the Federal Circuit on behalf of the PTO. He comes across as knowledgeable, fair, and articulate. Most importantly, it does not appear that he is trying to pursue any hidden agenda. Rather, he always seems to be trying to accurately apply existing case law to the facts at hand.
Mr. Krause recently argued the case of In re Siemens Water Technologies Holding Corp. You can listen to the entire oral argument here: [Listen]. I think this case is particularly interesting for the way that Judge Clevenger probed for an explanation of how the PTO goes about making the factual determination of combining references in a 103 rejection and whether an examiner should be entitled to such a high degree of deference in stating a prima facie case of unpatentability in matters of “common sense” and “design choice” [Listen].
Most prosecutors will get a chuckle out of this exchange about the limits on the use of “design choice” by examiners: [Listen].
The Rule 36 opinion is available here: [Read].