Category: Ex Parte Prosecution
-
Microsoft v. i4i – Part III: Changing the Presumption of Validity: Impact on Reexamination Practice
Posted March 14, 2011 The prior post discussed only some of the many options the Supreme Court has in the Microsoft v. i4i case (i4i). In summary, the presumption of validity of a patent as we currently know it may be changed and the standard of proof required for an accused infringer to prove invalidity…
-
Microsoft v. i4i – Part II: The Supreme Court’s Many Options
Posted March 6, 2011 The previous post included a summary of the facts from the Microsoft petition for certiorari. The Supreme Court has several options when deciding the outcome of this case. It can maintain the Federal Circuit’s existing presumption of validity. On the other hand, it can relieve an accused infringer from having to…
-
Microsoft v. i4i and the Presumption of Validity – Part 1
Posted March 5, 2011 In Microsoft v. i4i, which has been granted certiorari by the Supreme Court, Microsoft’s position is that the presumption of validity should not be enjoyed by a patent owner for prior art not considered by an Examiner in ex parte prosecution of a patent application. The upshot of its position is…
-
Patent Law Reform or Just Patent Law Change???
There is a lot of talk about the various patent reform bills that have been proposed as of late, like S.23. Phrases like “patent reform” sound great, but are these proposed bills patent law reform or merely patent law change? If you reform something, the connotation is that you improve it or make it better. If you change…
-
In re Tanaka
Suppose you issued a patent with several claims, including dependent claims. Now, suppose you wished you had claimed and issued a certain dependent claim, but did not have it in the originally issued patent. That new dependent claim is narrower than your independent claim that issued, so this is not a case of a broadening reissue. Now…
-
Patent Prosecution in View of Reexamination
In my last post I introduced reexamination briefly. Once you understand that patent claims can be cancelled in a reexamination, it begs the question of how patent applications and claims can be drafted to survive reexamination. I have both good news and bad news. THE BAD NEWS The bad news is that it is impossible to know all of the prior art…
-
Introduction: Why all of the interest in reexamination?
How many times have you heard: “They got a patent on that! There’s nothing new about that. It’s been out there for years!”? For those versed in patent matters, that is not a surprising reaction to certain issued patents. The patent issuance procedure in the U.S. relies on examination of a patent application. The sources and tools for examination are increasing…