Short answer: Yes, but…
Short answer: Yes, but… Many practitioners in sensitive technology areas file patent applications with non-publication requests or may abandon their applications if examination is not going well...more
9/12/2024
/ Artificial Intelligence ,
Databases ,
Internet ,
Notice of Allowance ,
Office Actions ,
Patent Applications ,
Patent-Eligible Subject Matter ,
Policies and Procedures ,
Prior Art ,
Search Engines ,
Technology ,
USPTO ,
Websites
Takeaways:
1. ODP in reexamination and reissue remains unpredictable despite Allergan
2. Patent Owners should carefully review ODP rejections to ensure they are proper
Obviousness-type double patenting (ODP) is a legal...more
8/28/2024
/ Allergan Inc ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Obviousness ,
Obviousness-Type Double Patenting (ODP) ,
Patent Expiration ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Ownership ,
Patent Re-Examination ,
Patent Reissue Applications ,
Patent Term Extensions ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Pharmaceutical Industry ,
Pharmaceutical Patents ,
Reissue Patents ,
USPTO
Takeaways:
1. Nontraditional and unique issue petitions are common for patent owners to properly prosecute reexamination proceedings.
2. Well-drafted petitions influence outcomes and preserve PTAB, District Court, and/or...more
As mentioned in last month’s IP Practice Tips, reissue applications are subject to additional legal doctrines founded in requirements of 35 U.S.C. § 251. One doctrine that has been operative since the first reissue statute...more
One way that reexamination advantageously differs from other administrative post-grant review processes is the absence of word or page counts as a limiting factor in presenting the challenge, here substantial new questions of...more
7/22/2024
/ America Invents Act ,
Ex Partes Reexamination ,
Filing Requirements ,
New Regulations ,
Patent Ownership ,
Patent Re-Examination ,
Patent Re-Issue ,
Patents ,
Post-Grant Review ,
Public Comment ,
Regulatory Requirements ,
Section 304
The requirement for disclosure, candor, and good faith between an applicant/patent owner and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) serves an important public interest. Succinctly, each individual associated with the...more
6/21/2024
/ Central Reexamination Unit (CRU) ,
Confidential Information ,
Duty to Disclose ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Ownership ,
Patent Reissue Applications ,
Patents ,
Post-Grant Review ,
Reissue Patents ,
USPTO
One of the advantages of filing a reissue application within two years of the original patent’s grant is the ability to seek broader claims. More often than not, however, a broadening Reissue will be rejected by the CRU...more
In the mid-2000s, the U.S. Patent Office (USPTO) determined that reexaminations would be more consistent and legally correct if performed by a centralized set of experienced and specially trained Examiners. As a result, the...more
In the mid-2000s, the U.S. Patent Office (USPTO) determined that reexaminations would be more consistent and legally correct if performed by a centralized set of experienced and specially trained Examiners. As a result, the...more
5/20/2024
/ Central Reexamination Unit (CRU) ,
Claim Construction ,
Ex Partes Reexamination ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Patent Ownership ,
Patent Reissue Applications ,
Patents ,
Post-Grant Review ,
Prior Art ,
USPTO
Takeaways:
-A requester can have a voice in ex parte reexamination prosecution.
- Requesters should strategically structure their request documents to hedge against potential patent owner amendment and argument.
The...more
Takeaways:
-Not all patent errors are correctible via Reissue.
- Restriction practice applies to Reissue applications.
1. Non-Elected Invention Recapture: A reissue application cannot add claims directed to a...more
Takeaways:
- Patent owner requested reexaminations are not an admission of claim unpatentability.
- Patent owners can and should control the reexamination request narrative.
Patent owners must consider the pros and...more
A significant procedure for patent owners, Supplemental Examination, was established in the 2012 America Invents Act when Congress determined there should be a proceeding to turn events that in the past could lead to...more
4/19/2024
/ America Invents Act ,
Disclosure Requirements ,
Ex Partes Reexamination ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Patent Examinations ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Ownership ,
Patents ,
Prior Art ,
Supplemental Examination ,
USPTO
From time to time, a patent owner may become aware of an error in her patent. Some errors may be minor, and the patent owner may seek correction of minor errors via a USPTO Certificate of Correction (CoC). With a CoC, the...more
Long before the America Invents Act (AIA) created the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) patent revocation proceedings, the patentability of one or more claims of any patent could be reviewed via Ex Parte Reexamination...more
4/17/2024
/ America Invents Act ,
Design Patent ,
Director of the USPTO ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Patent Ownership ,
Patent Re-Examination ,
Patent Re-Issue ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Prior Art ,
USPTO ,
Utility Patents
In the mid-2000s, the U.S. Patent Office (USPTO) determined that reexaminations would be more consistent and legally correct if performed by a centralized set of experienced and specially trained Examiners. As a result, the...more
In our PTAB Spotlight Series, attorneys will share their valuable insights on PTAB practice today, the challenges and opportunities clients face, and the trends practitioners should follow.
Jason D. Eisenberg is a director...more
The recent resurgence in ex parte reexamination demonstrates the importance of this post-grant review vehicle. It has become particularly important for patent challengers who may be estopped from requesting inter partes...more
2/19/2024
/ America Invents Act ,
Ex Partes Reexamination ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Ownership ,
Patent Term Adjustment ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patent-Eligible Subject Matter ,
Patentability Search ,
Patents ,
USPTO
This Year in Review synthesizes key events and decisions from 2023 into a digestible guide that we hope will serve as a helpful reference for those who practice before, or adjacent to, the PTAB. As in the past, many of our...more
2/12/2024
/ America Invents Act ,
Corporate Counsel ,
Ex Partes Reexamination ,
Intellectual Property Litigation ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Post-Grant Review ,
Standard Essential Patents ,
USPTO
The Federal Circuit recently held that a Patent Owner could not use disclaimers argued in an IPR proceeding for claim construction within the same IPR proceeding.
In CUPP Computing AS v. Trend Micro Inc., Case 20-2262,...more
The Federal Circuit recently held that clarifying and §112-based amendments are allowed in addition to narrowing amendments used to overcome prior art teachings in Motions to Amend during PTAB proceedings.
In American...more
The PTAB Strategies and Insights newsletter provides timely updates and insights into how best to handle proceedings at the USPTO. It is designed to increase return on investment for all stakeholders looking at the entire...more
Recently, in an effort to increase transparency and predictability, the new USPTO Director Vidal published “Interim process for PTAB decision circulation and internal PTAB review.” This initiative was included in a May 24th...more
On Friday May 27, 2022, the Federal Circuit added another opinion to the Arthrex line of cases. As a short refresher, Arthrex was back at the Federal Circuit after being remanded to the Board for Director Review after Patent...more
6/6/2022
/ Appeals ,
Appointments Clause ,
Arthrex Inc v Smith & Nephew Inc ,
Constitutional Challenges ,
Federal Vacancies Reform Act ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Petition For Rehearing ,
Remand ,
Separation of Powers ,
USPTO
As post grant review allows for on sale bar assertions, and thus experimental use defenses, we wanted to highlight a recent case addressing these issues.
Sunoco sued Venture and U.S. Oil Co. for infringement of U.S. Patent...more
6/3/2022
/ Claim Construction ,
Clear and Convincing Evidence ,
Damages ,
Evidence ,
Experimental Use Exception ,
Inventions ,
Inventors ,
On-Sale Bar ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Post-Grant Review ,
Section 102 ,
Vacated