Reissue vs. Reexamination in IPR and PGR Practice - Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
Never Surrender? Recapturing Subject Matter in Reissue Proceedings
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Trial & Appeal Board’s rejection of a proposed reissue claim for being broader than the original claim, denying the inventors’ argument that the analysis...more
On March 13, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a five-year patent term extension (“PTE”) for Merck’s sugammadex patent, holding that the district court had correctly calculated PTE based on the...more
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 - -Intra-patent claim inconsistencies are errors correctible via reissue. -Subtle legal distinctions in reissue may require PTAB appeals. Patent prosecution errors occur. One such error that occurs is...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
Inter partes activity involving design patents at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) was relatively low in 2024. The PTAB rendered just two inter partes decisions involving design patents: Next Step Group, Inc. v....more
According to recent U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (Office) data, the Office receives a burdensome number (13%) of information disclosure statements (IDSs) having in excess of 50 total items of information. 89 Fed. Reg....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
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
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
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
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
The Federal Circuit appeal in Merck Sharp & Dohme B.V., Merck Sharp & Dohme, LLC v. Aurobindo Pharma USA, Inc. et al., concerns whether patent term extension (PTE) for regulatory delay, in particular delay for FDA drug...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