What legal precedents support the USPTO’s handling of untimely papers in ex parte reexamination?
The USPTO’s handling of untimely papers in ex parte reexamination is supported by several legal precedents. MPEP 2225 cites the following cases: Patlex Corp. v. Mossinghoff, 771 F.2d 480, 226 USPQ 985, 989 (Fed. Cir. 1985) In re Knight, 217 USPQ 294 (Comm’r Pat. 1982) In re Amp, 212 USPQ 826 (Comm’r Pat. 1981) These…
Read MoreWhat legal precedents support the application of intervening rights in reexamination?
Several important legal cases have established and reinforced the application of intervening rights in reexamination proceedings. The MPEP 2293 cites the following key cases: Fortel Corp. v. Phone-Mate, Inc., 825 F.2d 1577, 3 USPQ2d 1771 (Fed. Cir. 1987) Kaufman Co., Inc. v. Lantech, Inc., 807 F.2d 970, 1 USPQ2d 1202 (Fed. Cir. 1986) Tennant Co.…
Read MoreWhat are the legal precedents relevant to the utility requirement in patent law?
The utility requirement in patent law is supported by various legal precedents. MPEP 716.08 directs readers to relevant sections for an overview of these precedents: “See MPEP § 2107 – § 2107.03 generally for utility examination guidelines and an overview of legal precedent relevant to the utility requirement of 35 U.S.C. 101.” These sections of…
Read More