Mother, May I?

more+
less-

In Toyota Motor Corporation v. American Vehicular Sciences LLC, IPR2013-00415, Pape 51, IPR2013-00416, Paper 35, IPR2013-00417, Paper 62 (August 7, 2014), the patent owner submitted a notice of withdrawal of motion to amend “without prejudice” to pursue the same claims in another application or proceeding.  The Board explained that the paper was more than merely a notice of withdrawal of its Motion to Amend, because it specified the desired effect or consequence of the withdrawal. The Board treated the Notice as a motion, which pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.20(b), cannot be filed without prior authorization from the Board, and ordered it expunged.

In Iron Dome LLC v. Chinook Licensing DE, LLC., IPR2014-00674, Paper 7 (August 7, 2014), the Board treated the patent owners request for an award of its attorney’s fees associated with the proceeding, as “sanctions pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.12? as an unauthorized motion, and required the patent owner to file a new response.

These are timely reminders that the Board should be consulted before any filing (even one attempting with withdraw a prior filing).


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

Written by:

more+
less-

Harness, Dickey & Pierce, PLC on:

Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:

Sign up to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.
×
Loading...
×
×