Tag Archives: Patent Law

Supreme Court Declines To Review “New And Improved” Written Description Requirement

Posted on February 22, 2012 by Warren Woessner

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court denied Centocor’s (now “Janssen”) petition for cert. and so let stand a ruling that Centocor’s patents on humanized monoclonal antibodies (covering Abbott’s Humira) are invalid for failure to meet the written description requirement (WDR) of … Continue reading →

Posted in Written Description Requirements (WDR) | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

A “Modest Proposal” For The RCE Crisis

Posted on February 10, 2012 by Warren Woessner

Commentators, including Prof. Hal Wegner, have been sounding the alarm regarding the increasing number of requests for continuing examination that applicants are filing. The PTO projects 325,000 RCE’s by FY 2018. They have gone further in recent posts, in attributing … Continue reading →

Posted in AIA Patent Reform, USPTO Practice and Policy | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Supplemental Examination Decision Tree – Lots of Dead Branches?

Posted on January 31, 2012 by Warren Woessner

Well, I wish it were that simple, but I keep trying to conjure examples that would lead me to use supplemental examination to “purge inequitable conduct (IC)” that I discover after my patent issues, and which could provide the basis … Continue reading →

Posted in AIA Patent Reform | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

PTO Proposes Supplemental Examination Rules – Extremely Expensive and Incredibly Complex

Posted on January 26, 2012 by Warren Woessner

On January 25, 2012, the USPTO published proposed rules to implement the supplemental examination provisions of the America Invents Act (“AIA”). This procedure is intended to be utilized by patent owners to “clean up” patents of iffy validity before, say, … Continue reading →

Posted in AIA Patent Reform | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment