Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The inter partes review procedure was enacted on September 16, 2012 as part of the America Invents Act. [1] It replaced a previous review procedure called inter partes reexamination, which in turn stemmed from ex parte reexamination proceedings.
A request for a reexamination can be filed by anyone at any time during the period of enforceability of a patent. To request a reexamination, one must submit a "request for reexamination" which includes (1) a statement pointing out each "substantial new question of patentability based on prior patents and printed publications; (2) an identification and explanation for every claim for which ...
Review of inter partes reexamination. Direct appeal to the Federal Circuit is the only option for judicial review in inter partes reexamination cases. [10] Additional USPTO facilities. Establishes additional USPTO satellite offices, the first to be located in Detroit, Michigan. [10] Third-party submission of prior art.
US Congress established an inter partes reexamination to allow the USPTO to review validity of issued patents with participation of third party challengers. However, just like the ex parte reexamination introduced earlier, this process failed to gain popularity, in part due to being slow and to barring subsequent civil litigation. 2006. In eBay v.
In law, inter partes (Law Latin for 'between the parties' [1]) is a legal term that can be distinguished from in rem, which refers to a legal action whose jurisdiction is based on the control of property, or ex parte, which refers to a legal action that is by a single party.
2200, Citation of Prior Art and Ex Parte Reexamination of Patents; 2300, Interference Proceedings; 2400, Biotechnology; 2500, Maintenance Fees; 2600, Optional Inter Partes Reexamination; 2700, Patent Terms and Extensions; 2800, Supplemental Examination; 2900, International Design Applications; Appendix I, Partial List of Trademarks'
The Trial Division, handles contested cases such as Inter Partes Review, Post Grant Review, Transitional Program for Covered Business Method Patents, and Derivation Proceedings. [2] The PTAB is headed by a Chief Administrative Patent Judge, currently Scott R. Boalick. [3]
In order to discourage abuse of these proceedings, third-party participants may not later assert that a patent is invalid "on any ground that [they] raised or could have raised during the inter partes reexamination proceedings." Some observers believe that this estoppel dissuades potential requesters from use of reexamination, forcing them into ...