Wolf Greenfield Attorneys Preview What’s Ahead in 2024
Patentees may obtain additional PTA if the USPTO’s calculation of “applicant delay” includes a period of time during which the patentee could have taken “no identifiable effort” to avoid. However, the onus is entirely on the...more
Federal Circuit Summary - Before Dyk, Schall, and Reyna. Appeal from U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. Summary: The USPTO is only authorized to reduce Patent Term Adjustment (PTA) for applicant...more
According to this bulletin from Lee International IP & Law Group in South Korea, Korean patents filed on or after March 2012 may be entitled to Patent Term Adjustment if they issued more than 4 years after the filing date and...more
Last month, in Pfizer, Inc. v. Lee, the Federal Circuit determined that the District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia did not err in granting summary judgment in favor of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office on the...more
In Pfizer v. Lee (No. 2015-1265, January 22, 2016), the Federal Circuit upheld the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (USPTO) determination that the toll period for A-type patent term adjustment (PTA) delay stops upon the...more
In Pfizer v. Lee, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that a “defective” restriction requirement was sufficient to stop the period of patent term adjustment granted when the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office...more
In Mohsenzadeh v. Lee, the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s decision that the USPTO’s delay in issuing a Restriction Requirement in a parent application does not earn Patent Term Adjustment (PTA) for the ensuing...more