200 companies express further concerns over Patent Reform Act of 2007 The hits just keep on coming for the Patent Reform Act of 2007 (H.R. 1908 and S. 1145). Over the past two weeks, Chief Judge Paul Michel of the Federal Circuit sent two letters criticizing portions of the Act. Before that, a group of Senators noted their concerns with the Act. Just after the Act […] Continue Reading →
Three groups meet with OMB to stop continuation rules from being implemented In an effort to prevent the much–discussed impending rules changing continuation practice and the number of claims from being finalized, there were three meetings held regarding the proposed rules during May and June at the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), the office that must review and approve all regulations promulgated by federal agencies. It […] Continue Reading →
Peer to Patent “community” patent review officially launches The Peer to Patent project (previously blogged about June 7, March 5, and February 28) is now up and running for its one year trial period. As noted previously, only computer-related applications are eligible for this pilot program. Thus far, there are five applications in the system: User selectable management alert format (assigned to Hewlett […] Continue Reading →
Senators express concern over Patent Reform Act of 2007 In a letter to the Chairman and Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Committee (which held hearings on the Patent Reform Act of 2007 last week), several Republican members of the committee expressed reservations about the current version of the bill. The contingent, made up of Senators Sam Brownback (R-KS), Tom Coburn (R-OK), Chuck Grassley […] Continue Reading →
Patent Office officially announces pilot plan for submission of prior art by third parties The USPTO yesterday officially announced the institution of a pilot project concerning "public submission of peer reviewed prior art." As we previously blogged on March 5 and February 28, the pilot project will be voluntary, and limited initially to the "computer arts." It will be handled on the Peer-to-Patent website, developed by the Community Patent […] Continue Reading →
Senate hearings on the Patent Reform Act of 2007 As noted previously, the Senate yesterday held hearings on the Patent Reform Act of 2007 (S. 1145). The witnesses were: Jon W. Dudas, Undersecretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the USPTO Bruce G. Bernstein, chief intellectual property and licensing officer, InterDigital Communications Corp. Mary Doyle, Senior Vice President, General Counsel, and Secretary, […] Continue Reading →
Senate to hold its first hearings on Patent Reform Act of 2007 While the House subcommittee on Courts, the Internet, and Intellectual Property (a subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee) held hearings on the Patent Reform Act of 2007 (H.R. 1908, S. 1145) at the end of April, the Senate is just now getting into the act. On Wednesday, June 6 at 10:00 Eastern time, the full […] Continue Reading →
Federal Circuit: Board can’t use its own expertise as evidentiary substitute in interferences The Federal Circuit today held that during inter partes proceedings, the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (the Board) cannot, under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), rely on its own expertise when making factual findings if there is no evidence of record supporting its conclusion. The court did not opine whether this limitation extended to […] Continue Reading →
More continuation rules rumormongering: 2 continuations + 1 RCE? With the AIPLA 2007 spring meeting going on in Boston this week, there has been no shortage of rumors flying about the substance of the new continuation rules expected to be issued by the USPTO in July. According to multiple reports (all apparently originating with Hal Wegner), the substance of the rules is likely to […] Continue Reading →
USPTO issues memo detailing preliminary obviousness instructions in light of KSR As reported on Patently-O, the USPTO has issued a memo to the technology center directors regarding examination of applications in light of KSR. The good news is that the USPTO seems to have taken to heart the statement in the KSR opinion that "[t]o facilitate review, [the obviousness] analysis should be explicit." More details after […] Continue Reading →