Patent Law Weblog
recent posts
- USPTO Announces That It Has Turned the Corner on Unexamined Application Backlog
- Reasons for the PTAB’s Priority Determination in Broad’s Favor (Perhaps)
- Mexico Publishes Amendments to Intellectual Property Law
- PTAB (Again) Awards Priority of Invention to Broad in Interference No. 106,115
- Argentina Repeals Pharmaceutical Patent Examination Guidelines
about
Category: Patent Office Rules & Procedures
-
By Robert Dailey — The Intellectual Property Owners Association (IPO) has finally weighed in on the new Markush rules that were released this August (see 72 Fed. Reg. 44992 (Aug. 10, 2007); "Patent Office Proposes New Rules for Alternative Claiming"). The comments center on two themes: (1) that the new rules have the…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — The patent blogging team of John White and Eugene Quinn will be doing their part to keep the rest of us informed about the progress of the temporary restraining order/preliminary injunction hearing to be held on Wednesday in GlaxoSmithKline’s lawsuit against Jon Dudas and the U.S. Patent and…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — Like the most popular kid at a high school dance being the first to take the floor, GlaxoSmithKline’s (GSK) lawsuit against John Dudas and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s new continuation and claims rules entitled "Changes to Practice for Continued Examination Filings, Patent Applications Containing Patentably-indistinct Claims…
-
By Donald Zuhn — Yesterday, we reported on a second letter that was sent to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) criticizing the IDS rules proposed by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office on July 10, 2006 (see "Changes to Information Disclosure Statement Requirements and Other Related Matters," 71 Fed. Reg. 38,808). …
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — As reported recently by Patent Docs (see "Hooray! – (Finally) the Big Dogs Have Joined the Hunt"), GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) filed suit on October 9th in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia against John Dudas and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, asking for preliminary…
-
By Donald Zuhn — Last week, we reported on a letter that David Boundy, the Vice President of Intellectual Property for Cantor Fitzgerald L.P., sent to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) on behalf of twenty-five companies and organizations, criticizing the IDS rules proposed by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office on…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — Resistance to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s new continuation and claims rules continues to grow (although how effective that resistance will be less than two weeks before the rules are implemented is a problematic question). The latest salvo comes from the Practising Law Institute’s Patent Blog, in…
-
By Donald Zuhn — Earlier today, David Boundy, the Vice President of Intellectual Property for Cantor Fitzgerald L.P., provided Patent Docs (and other members of the patent law blogging community) with a copy of a letter he sent to Susan Dudley of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs of the Office of…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — Last week, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office promulgated its long-awaited guidelines for Examiners in making obviousness determinations in view of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc. (see "Patent Office Issues Examination Guidelines Regarding Obviousness after KSR"). As part of these guidelines,…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — The Patent Office has met the enemy, and it is the patent bar. This has been evident since the original Notice of Proposed Rulemaking with regard to the continuation and claims limitations rules, where the Office blamed the bar for the proliferation of continuation applications and alleged prolixity…
Patent Docs 