Wolf Greenfield Attorneys Review 2024 and Look Ahead to 2025
(Podcast) The Briefing: A Very Patented Christmas – The Quirkiest Inventions for the Holiday Season
The Briefing: A Very Patented Christmas – The Quirkiest Inventions for the Holiday Season
5 Key Takeaways | Alice at 10: A Section 101 Update
New Developments in Obviousness-Type Double Patenting and Original Patent Requirements — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Trending Now: An IP Podcast - Artificial Intelligence Patents & Emerging Regulatory Laws
John Harmon on the Evolving Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Intellectual Property
Rob Sahr on the Administration’s Aggressive Approach to Bayh-Dole Compliance
The Briefing: The Patent Puzzle: USPTO's Guidelines for AI Inventions
The Briefing: The Patent Puzzle: USPTO's Guidelines for AI Inventions (Podcast)
Wolf Greenfield Attorneys Preview What’s Ahead in 2024
Noteworthy Points in the Rules for the Implementation of China's Patent Law 2023
5 Key Takeaways | Best Practices in Patent Drafting: Addressing 112 and Enablement after Amgen
Third Party Observation in Patent Prosecution in China
Building a Cost-Effective Global Patent Portfolio Using the Netherlands
Greater Speed and Efficiency: Steps IP Offices Around the World Are Taking to Streamline the Patent Process
Ways to Amend the Claims in the Patent Invalidation Proceedings
Estoppel Doctrine in China's Patent System
3 Key Takeaways | Third party Prior Art Submissions at USPTO
Patent Dual-application Strategy in China
Takeaways - - Pre-AIA patents may be able to “swear behind” prior art applied in reissue and reexamination. - “Swearing behind” has limits and obtaining sufficient evidence to establish prior invention may be difficult to...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
Takeaways - - Requestor submissions in reexamination proceedings are exempt from triggering IDS size fees. - Correcting filing benefit claims in reissue triggers the new continuing application fee. As we noted in our...more
Patent Examiners rely upon the Manual of Patent Examination Procedure (MPEP) to instruct application of the law to the most common patent prosecution situations. The MPEP’s forward refers to itself as a “guidance document”...more
This month we take a deeper dive into petitions practice for cases handled by the Central Reexamination Unit (CRU). As noted in our previous article, issues of first impression sometimes arise in cases before the CRU where...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 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
Hosted by American Conference Institute, the 20th Annual Paragraph IV Disputes & the 40th Anniversary of the Hatch-Waxman Act returns for another exciting year with curated programming that will take a retrospective look at...more
Addressing the same invention requirement for reissue patents, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a Patent Trial & Appeal Board decision to reject an overly broad reissue application. In re Float‘N’Grill...more