Do not let an Examiner muddy up a deficient prior art rejection with written description concerns.

A recent PTAB ex part appeal by Schlumberger illustrates a good example of how to limit unreasonably broad interpretations created by an Examiner.

We are pleased to report that our blog has been awarded as one of the top 100 Intellectual Property Blogs! We are very honored by this recognition and promise to continue bringing our readers more insights into patent prosecution techniques and related matters.

IBM fails to overcome Section 101 rejection, even with a very detailed claim, because it is directed to a business problem, not a technical problem.

As highlighted in a previous post, Section 101 (Alice) rejections have been increasingly applied according to constantly evolving guidelines that make it difficult to avoid or overcome allegations that a claim is directed to an abstract idea. As evidenced by the examples provided in the above-linked post and even in a recent post about an…

Petitioning restrictions can sometimes result in no decision. This can be good or bad depending on your goals in prosecution. Read more to see some examples that illustrate the distinction.

Section 101 appeals are tough to win at the PTAB, and this case illustrates the challenges facing clients hoping to protect their new ideas aimed at improving social networks.

What to do when an Examiner repeatedly shifts the basis for restriction without ever making the requirement final.

Petitions can be part of an appeal strategy and this Philips case illustrates a prime example.

Restriction requirements under Unity of Invention should not rely on intended use to read out  limitations that fall under a safe harbor of the CFRs.