What is the significance of the In re Construction Equipment Company case for reexamination proceedings?
The case of In re Construction Equipment Company, 665 F.3d 1254, 100 USPQ2d 1922 (Fed. Cir. 2011) is significant for reexamination proceedings as it reinforces the principle that neither claim preclusion (res judicata) nor issue preclusion (collateral estoppel) typically bar reexamination. According to MPEP § 2659: “See also In re Construction Equipment Company, 665 F.3d…
Read MoreCan collateral estoppel be applied against the USPTO in reexamination proceedings?
No, collateral estoppel (issue preclusion) generally cannot be applied against the USPTO in reexamination proceedings based on a district court holding in an infringement proceeding. This principle was established in the case of In re Trans Texas Holdings Corp., 498 F.3d 1290, 83 USPQ2d 1835 (Fed. Cir. 2007). According to MPEP § 2659: “In In…
Read MoreCan collateral estoppel apply in patent reexamination proceedings?
Collateral estoppel, or issue preclusion, can apply in certain circumstances during patent reexamination proceedings. According to MPEP § 2259: “If the claims in a reexamination proceeding present the same issue(s) as claims that were finally held invalid by a federal court in a proceeding involving a different patent in the same patent family, collateral estoppel…
Read More