New England Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting, 57525-57526 [E7-19823]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 10, 2007 / Notices
logger attached externally. The purpose
of the additional protocols is to augment
current studies on harbor seal diet and
abundance. This amendment would not
result in capture or disturbance of
marine mammals beyond those numbers
already authorized by the subject
permit.
In compliance with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), an initial
determination has been made that the
activity proposed is categorically
excluded from the requirement to
prepare an environmental assessment or
environmental impact statement.
Concurrent with the publication of
this notice in the Federal Register,
NMFS is forwarding copies of this
application to the Marine Mammal
Commission and its Committee of
Scientific Advisors.
Dated: October 3, 2007.
P. Michael Payne,
Chief, Permits, Conservation and Education
Division, Office of Protected Resources,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. E7–19930 Filed 10–9–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
RIN: 0648–XD19
Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management
Council; Public Meetings
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of a public meeting.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Gulf of Mexico Fishery
Management Council will convene a
public meeting of the Habitat Protection
Advisory Panel (AP).
DATES: The meeting will convene at 8:30
a.m. on Thursday, October 25, 2007 and
conclude no later than 4 p.m.
ADDRESSES: This meeting will be held at
the New Orleans Airport Hilton, 901
Airline Highway, New Orleans, LA;
telephone: (504) 469–5000.
Council address: Gulf of Mexico
Fishery Management Council, 2203
North Lois Avenue, Suite 1100, Tampa,
FL 33607.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff
Rester, Habitat Support Specialist, Gulf
States Marine Fisheries Commission;
telephone: (228) 875–5912.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: At this
meeting, the AP will tentatively discuss
the Louisiana Coastal Protection and
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:08 Oct 09, 2007
Jkt 214001
Restoration Plan, a summary of the
Louisiana Coastal Protection and
Restoration Plan Habitat Evaluation
Team, widening of the Gulfport Harbor
Ship Channel, the Bienville Offshore
Energy Terminal Liquid Natural Gas
(LNG) Facility, Hurricane Katrina debris
removal in Louisiana coastal waters,
and potential habitat impacts from
hurricane levee construction.
The Louisiana/Mississippi group is
part of a three unit Habitat Protection
AP of the Gulf of Mexico Fishery
Management Council. The principal role
of the advisory panels is to assist the
Council in attempting to maintain
optimum conditions within the habitat
and ecosystems supporting the marine
resources of the Gulf of Mexico.
Advisory panels serve as a first alert
system to call to the Council’s attention
proposed projects being developed and
other activities which may adversely
impact the Gulf marine fisheries and
their supporting ecosystems. The panels
may also provide advice to the Council
on its policies and procedures for
addressing environmental affairs.
Although other issues not on the
agenda may come before the panel for
discussion, in accordance with the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act,
those issues may not be the subject of
formal panel action during this meeting.
Panel action will be restricted to those
issues specifically identified in the
agenda listed as available by this notice.
A copy of the agenda can be obtained
by calling (813) 348–1630.
Special Accommodations
This meeting is physically accessible
to people with disabilities. Requests for
sign language interpretation or other
auxiliary aids should be directed to Tina
Trezza at the Council (see ADDRESSES) at
least 5 working days prior to the
meeting.
Dated: October 3, 2007.
Tracey L. Thompson,
Acting Director, Office of Sustainable
Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. E7–19822 Filed 10–9–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
RIN: 0648–XD20
New England Fishery Management
Council; Public Meeting
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
57525
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of a public meeting.
SUMMARY: The New England Fishery
Management Council (Council) will
hold a one-day Council meeting on
October 25, 2007, to consider actions
affecting New England fisheries in the
exclusive economic zone (EEZ).
DATES: The meeting will be held on
Thursday, October 25 beginning at 9
a.m.
The meeting will be held at
the Sheraton Colonial Hotel, One
Audubon Road, Wakefield, MA 01880;
telephone: (781) 245–9300.
Council address: New England
Fishery Management Council, 50 Water
Street, Mill 2, Newburyport, MA 01950.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul
J. Howard, Executive Director, New
England Fishery Management Council;
telephone: (978) 465–0492.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
ADDRESSES:
Thursday, October 25, 2007
Following introductions, the Council
will review and approve final measures
for Framework Adjustment 19 to
Atlantic Sea Scallop Fishery
Management Plan. The biennial
adjustment will set management
measures for fishing years 2008 and
2009. Among others, management
measures will include days-at-sea
allocations, access area allocations,
specific measures for the general
category fishery, minor modifications to
the observer set-aside program,
consideration of new scallop rotational
areas, a revision to the overfishing
definition, a 30-day Vessel Monitoring
System power-down provision, a
prohibition on deck-loading scallops
and crew-size restrictions on access area
trips. Following a lunch break there will
be an opportunity for brief comments
from the public on items relevant to
Council business but not otherwise
listed on the agenda. The meeting will
adjourn once all sea scallop agenda
items are addressed.
Although other non-emergency issues
not contained in this agenda may come
before this Council for discussion, those
issues may not be the subjects of formal
action during this meeting. Council
action will be restricted to those issues
specifically listed in this notice and any
issues arising after publication of this
notice that require emergency action
under section 305(c) of the MagnusonStevens Act, provided that the public
has been notified of the Council’s intent
to take final action to address the
emergency.
E:\FR\FM\10OCN1.SGM
10OCN1
57526
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 10, 2007 / Notices
Special Accommodations
This meeting is physically accessible
to people with disabilities. Requests for
sign language interpretation or other
auxiliary aids should be directed to Paul
J. Howard (see ADDRESSES) at least 5
days prior to the meeting date.
Dated: October 3, 2007.
Tracey L. Thompson,
Acting Director, Office of Sustainable
Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. E7–19823 Filed 10–9–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Patent and Trademark Office
[Docket No.: PTO–P–2007–0031]
Examination Guidelines for
Determining Obviousness Under 35
U.S.C. 103 in View of the Supreme
Court Decision in KSR International
Co. v. Teleflex Inc.
United States Patent and
Trademark Office, Commerce.
ACTION: Notice.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The United States Patent and
Trademark Office (USPTO) is
publishing examination guidelines for
determining obviousness under 35
U.S.C. 103 in view of the Supreme Court
decision in KSR International Co. v.
Teleflex Inc. These guidelines will assist
USPTO personnel to make a proper
determination of obviousness under 35
U.S.C. 103 and to provide an
appropriate supporting rationale.
DATES: These guidelines are effective
October 10, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Contact either Kathleen Kahler Fonda,
Legal Advisor (telephone (571) 272–
7754; e-mail kathleen.fonda@uspto.gov)
or Pinchus M. Laufer, Patent
Examination Policy Analyst (telephone
(571) 272–7726; e-mail
pinchus.laufer@uspto.gov), of the Office
of the Deputy Commissioner for Patent
Examination Policy. Alternatively, mail
may be addressed to Ms. Fonda or Mr.
Laufer at Commissioner for Patents,
attn: KSR, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria,
VA 22313–1450.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: These
guidelines are intended to assist Office
personnel to make a proper
determination of obviousness under 35
U.S.C. 103, and to provide an
appropriate supporting rationale in view
of the recent decision by the Supreme
Court in KSR International Co. v.
Teleflex Inc. (KSR).1 The guidelines are
1 550
U.S. _, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:46 Oct 09, 2007
Jkt 211001
based on the Office’s current
understanding of the law, and are
believed to be fully consistent with the
binding precedent of the Supreme
Court.2
These guidelines do not constitute
substantive rule making and hence do
not have the force and effect of law.
They have been developed as a matter
of internal Office management and are
not intended to create any right or
benefit, substantive or procedural,
enforceable by any party against the
Office. Rejections will continue to be
based upon the substantive law, and it
is these rejections that are appealable.
Consequently, any failure by Office
personnel to follow the guidelines is
neither appealable nor petitionable.
To the extent that earlier guidance
from the Office, including certain
sections of the current Manual of Patent
Examining Procedure (MPEP), is
inconsistent with the guidance set forth
herein, Office personnel are to follow
these guidelines. The next revision of
the MPEP will be updated accordingly.
I. The KSR Decision and Principles of
the Law of Obviousness
Teleflex owned a patent claiming
technology useful in the gas pedal of a
car. The invention at issue in KSR was
a pedal assembly that could be adjusted
to accommodate drivers of different
statures. The electronic pedal-position
sensor was positioned on the support
for the pedal assembly, and the pivot
point of the pedal remained fixed
regardless of how the pedal assembly
was adjusted. This combination of the
fixed pivot point for the adjustable
pedal and the fixed sensor position on
the support resulted in a simpler,
lighter, and more compact design.
Teleflex sued KSR for infringement.
The district court cited references that
separately taught adjustable pedals and
sensors, and found on summary
judgment that Teleflex’s patent was
invalid for obviousness. On appeal, the
Federal Circuit vacated the district
court’s decision, and remanded the case.
The Federal Circuit stated that ‘‘the
district court’s analysis applied an
incomplete teaching-suggestionmotivation test’’ in arriving at the
finding of obviousness.3
Upon KSR’s petition for review of the
Federal Circuit’s decision, the Supreme
Court reversed, concluding that the
district court had correctly determined
that the patent was invalid for
2 Further developments in the law of obviousness
are to be expected in view of KSR. Thus, it is not
clear which Federal Circuit decisions will retain
their viability.
3 Teleflex Inc. v. KSR Int’l Co., 119 Fed. Appx.
282, 288 (Fed. Cir. 2005).
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
obviousness. The Supreme Court
reaffirmed the familiar framework for
determining obviousness as set forth in
Graham v. John Deere Co., but stated
that the Federal Circuit had erred by
applying the teaching-suggestionmotivation (TSM) test in an overly rigid
and formalistic way.4 Specifically, the
Supreme Court stated that the Federal
Circuit had erred in four ways: (1) ‘‘By
holding that courts and patent
examiners should look only to the
problem the patentee was trying to
solve;’’ 5 (2) by assuming ‘‘that a person
of ordinary skill attempting to solve a
problem will be led only to those
elements of prior art designed to solve
the same problem;’’ 6 (3) by concluding
‘‘that a patent claim cannot be proved
obvious merely by showing that the
combination of elements was ‘obvious
to try;’ ’’ 7 and (4) by overemphasizing
‘‘the risk of courts and patent examiners
falling prey to hindsight bias’’ and as a
result applying ‘‘[r]igid preventative
rules that deny factfinders recourse to
common sense.’’ 8
In KSR, the Supreme Court
particularly emphasized ‘‘the need for
caution in granting a patent based on
the combination of elements found in
the prior art,’’ 9 and discussed
circumstances in which a patent might
be determined to be obvious.
Importantly, the Supreme Court
reaffirmed principles based on its
precedent that ‘‘[t]he combination of
familiar elements according to known
methods is likely to be obvious when it
does no more than yield predictable
results.’’ 10 The Supreme Court stated
that there are ‘‘[t]hree cases decided
after Graham [that] illustrate this
doctrine.’’ 11 (1) ‘‘In United States v.
Adams, * * * [t]he Court recognized
that when a patent claims a structure
already known in the prior art that is
altered by the mere substitution of one
element for another known in the field,
the combination must do more than
yield a predictable result.’’ 12 (2) ‘‘In
Anderson’s-Black Rock, Inc. v.
Pavement Salvage Co., * * * [t]he two
[pre-existing elements] in combination
did no more than they would in
separate, sequential operation.’’ 13 (3)
‘‘[I]n Sakraida v. AG Pro, Inc., the Court
derived * * * the conclusion that when
550 U.S. at l, 82 USPQ2d at 1391.
at l, 82 USPQ2d at 1397.
4 KSR,
5 Id.
6 Id.
7 Id.
8 Id.
9 Id.
at l, 82 USPQ2d at 1395.
10 Id.
11 Id.
12 Id.
13 Id.
E:\FR\FM\10OCN1.SGM
10OCN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 195 (Wednesday, October 10, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 57525-57526]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-19823]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
RIN: 0648-XD20
New England Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of a public meeting.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The New England Fishery Management Council (Council) will hold
a one-day Council meeting on October 25, 2007, to consider actions
affecting New England fisheries in the exclusive economic zone (EEZ).
DATES: The meeting will be held on Thursday, October 25 beginning at 9
a.m.
ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Sheraton Colonial Hotel, One
Audubon Road, Wakefield, MA 01880; telephone: (781) 245-9300.
Council address: New England Fishery Management Council, 50 Water
Street, Mill 2, Newburyport, MA 01950.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul J. Howard, Executive Director,
New England Fishery Management Council; telephone: (978) 465-0492.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Thursday, October 25, 2007
Following introductions, the Council will review and approve final
measures for Framework Adjustment 19 to Atlantic Sea Scallop Fishery
Management Plan. The biennial adjustment will set management measures
for fishing years 2008 and 2009. Among others, management measures will
include days-at-sea allocations, access area allocations, specific
measures for the general category fishery, minor modifications to the
observer set-aside program, consideration of new scallop rotational
areas, a revision to the overfishing definition, a 30-day Vessel
Monitoring System power-down provision, a prohibition on deck-loading
scallops and crew-size restrictions on access area trips. Following a
lunch break there will be an opportunity for brief comments from the
public on items relevant to Council business but not otherwise listed
on the agenda. The meeting will adjourn once all sea scallop agenda
items are addressed.
Although other non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda
may come before this Council for discussion, those issues may not be
the subjects of formal action during this meeting. Council action will
be restricted to those issues specifically listed in this notice and
any issues arising after publication of this notice that require
emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act,
provided that the public has been notified of the Council's intent to
take final action to address the emergency.
[[Page 57526]]
Special Accommodations
This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities.
Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids
should be directed to Paul J. Howard (see ADDRESSES) at least 5 days
prior to the meeting date.
Dated: October 3, 2007.
Tracey L. Thompson,
Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. E7-19823 Filed 10-9-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S