Filewrapper

USPTO publishes Federal Register notice of revised patent fees

While most of the focus on USPTO rulemaking this week has been on the continuation and claim limit rules published on Tuesday, yesterday the USPTO published its revised list of patent fees. The new fees are designed to reflect changes in the CPI, and are effective September 30. Update (10/1): The USPTO has published a […]

Continue Reading →

New continuation and claim limit rules: the good, the bad, and the ugly

After having some time to parse out the details of the new rules promulgated by the USPTO on Tuesday, a few things jump out. For the most part, they could have been worse, but from the perspective of patent applicants, the new rules will likely result in more expensive applications, narrower coverage, and potentially the […]

Continue Reading →

USPTO not bound by district court claim construction on reexamination; obviousness affirmed

The Federal Circuit today addressed claim construction and obviousness in the context of a reexamination appeal. The patentee argued that the USPTO was bound, in reexamination, to apply the claim construction given the patents by a district court when the patents were in litigation before reexamination. The court found that because the USPTO was not […]

Continue Reading →

En banc Federal Circuit scraps affirmative duty of care to avoid infringement

In a unanimous en banc decision issued late yesterday afternoon, the Federal Circuit granted a petition for mandamus requested by a party who was ordered by a district court to produce attorney-client privileged and work product protected material of its trial counsel, and to permit deposition of its trial counsel. The order was entered after […]

Continue Reading →

New continuation rules published

As noted yesterday, the new continuation rules have been published in today's issue of the Federal Register. The bulk of the publication is responses to the numerous comments sent to the USPTO after the rules were initially published in January 2006. The introductory material explains the gist of the new rules, and runs from page […]

Continue Reading →

Priority claim to foreign filing awarded in interference; disclosure in compliance with section 112

The Federal Circuit yesterday addressed the requirements for the use of a foreign filing date as a priority date in a U.S. interference proceeding. The court awarded the interference party the priority benefit of the foreign filing date based on the "constructive reduction to practice of an invention whose disclosure is in compliance with the […]

Continue Reading →

Continuation and claims rules to publish tomorrow, August 21st, will take effect November 1st

Tthe USPTO announced in a press release today that it will publish in tomorrow's Federal Register the final rules on continuation applications and the number of claims. The rules will take effect November 1, 2007. The USPTO describes the rules in its press release: The new rules have been modified, relative to the rules that […]

Continue Reading →

Another patent invalid after KSR, with help from an innovative online litigation strategy

Peter Zura has an interesting post about a case in the Eastern District of Texas (one of the most popular districts for patent cases to be filed) where a patent was held to be both anticipated and, failing that, obvious in light of KSR. The court also addressed the concept of joint infringement, which the […]

Continue Reading →

Attorney cannot directly appeal finding of inequitable conduct absent formal sanctions

The Federal Circuit today addressed whether a prosecuting attorney who was found to have committed inequitable conduct during an infringement suit of the patent prosecuted may intervene to contest the finding. The court held that when an attorney is merely criticized by the court, not formally reprimanded, they have no standing to appeal. As a […]

Continue Reading →

Second Circuit: Advertisement can be literally false even if no explicitly false assertion made

Yesterday the Second Circuit handed down a decision concerning a preliminary injunction that clarifies false advertising under the Lanham Act, especially regarding the use of images in advertisements. In an opinion containing the unlikely combination of pop icons William Shatner and Jessica Simpson, the court adopted the "false by necessary implication" doctrine and concluded that […]

Continue Reading →

Stay in Touch

Receive the latest news and updates from us and our attorneys.

Sign Up