Strategic Use of Terminal Disclaimer

more+
less-
more+
less-

In Amkor Technology, Inc. v. Tessera, Inc., IPR201-00242, Paper 117, (April 14, 2014), the patent owner filed a terminal disclaimer of the remainder of the patent term (which was going to expire later in the year), to force the Board to apply the construed meaning of the claims, instead of the broadest reasonable interpretation (arguing that expiration of the patent prevented use of the BRI).  The patent owner believed that when the contrued meaning is applied, the inter partes review should be terminated.  The Board authorized the parties to brief the issues.

Topics:  Patent Terms, Patents, Terminal Disclaimer

Published In: Civil Procedure Updates, Intellectual Property Updates

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Harness, Dickey & Pierce, PLC | Attorney Advertising

Don't miss a thing! Build a custom news brief:

Read fresh new writing on compliance, cybersecurity, Dodd-Frank, whistleblowers, social media, hiring & firing, patent reform, the NLRB, Obamacare, the SEC…

…or whatever matters the most to you. Follow authors, firms, and topics on JD Supra.

Create your news brief now - it's free and easy »