Corresponding structures for Means-Plus-Function claims must be more than Prior art references listed in the patent – the structures must be expressly disclosed in the specification - Pressure Products Medical Supplies v. Greatbatch (Fed. Cir. Mar. 24, 2010)

Pressure Products Medical Supplies v. Greatbatch (Fed. Cir. Mar. 24, 2010)
The Federal Circuit overruled a district court’s claim construction,  vacated the district court’s finding of infringement and remanded for further proceedings in light of the correct claim construction.  The trial court erroneously used structures from the prior art references listed in the patent to provide a definition for “score lines”  encompassing structures not disclosed expressly in the patent specification.
US 5312355 http://www.google.com/patents?vid=USPAT5312355
US 5125904 http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=Y78EAAAAEBAJ&d

USPTO – Streamlines appeal brief review process - only the Chief Judge and his staff will conduct a compliance review of appeal briefs

David Kappos announced on his public Blog, (March 30,2010) that only the Chief Judge and his staff will conduct a compliance review of appeal briefs at the time of filing.  This new process eliminates 2 layers of review; the examiner and the Patent Appeal Center.   This should reduce processing time and yield more uniform decisions on formalities compliance.

To further reduce the number of noncompliant appeal briefs, the Chief Judge has posted on the USPTO website the “Top Eight Reasons Appeal Briefs are Non-Compliant”—which applicants should read closely to avoid the common mistakes that result in defective briefs and delays.

Blog post is here http://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/streamlining_the_appeals_process_and