Category: Uncategorized
-

These aren’t the droids (101 experts) you’re looking for…
The USPTO is denying they have Section 101 experts at the same time as these experts are conducting interviews and providing guidance to examiners. Why?
-

A time to appeal
An early appeal before the examiner has had a chance to “better” the rejection can sometimes end the case without ever having to deal with those “better” rejections.
-

Quality Assurance Specialists In the Appeal Process
Do the quality experts get involved with Appeals? Do they weed out bad rejections or rubber stamp the examiners?
-

To emphasize or not – that is the question
To emphasize or not in your patent prosecution arguments. While we do not answer this question, this post illustrates how the applicant should be careful – it can be dangerous to emphasize language that in a way that the other side can use the emphasis to their advantage.
-

Substantially is Substantially OK in Patent Claims
Know the rules for what it takes to retain flexibility in the claim scope.
-

Implicit Motivation to Combine
Read about motivation to combine and an exception that can swallow the rule.
-

Appeal Brief Rules – Who Enforces?
Can the examiner or examiner appeal panel object to the format of the appeal brief? Read on to find out and see what happens when they try.
-

Double Standards at the USPTO
What happens when an examiner fails to follow the rules in an Examiner’s Answer? Read on to find out.
-

The Sneaky Printed Matter Doctrine
It can show up even when you are not expecting it. Anytime an applicant is relying on a visual indicator’s function to differentiate the state of the art, be careful to consider the Printed Matter Doctrine.