I am always impressed when I listen to recordings of Tom Krause arguing before\u00a0the Federal Circuit on behalf of the PTO.\u00a0 He comes across as knowledgeable, fair, and articulate.\u00a0 Most importantly, it does not appear that he is trying to pursue any hidden agenda.\u00a0 Rather, he always seems to be trying to accurately apply existing case law to the\u00a0facts at hand.<\/p>\n
Mr. Krause recently argued the case of In re Siemens Water Technologies Holding Corp<\/span>.\u00a0 You can listen to the entire oral argument here: [Listen<\/a>].\u00a0 I think this case is particularly interesting for the way that Judge Clevenger probed for an explanation of \u00a0how the PTO goes about making the factual determination of combining references in a 103 rejection\u00a0and 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<\/a>].\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n Most prosecutors will get a chuckle out of this exchange about the limits on the\u00a0use of “design choice” by examiners: [Listen<\/a>].<\/p>\n