October 20, 2021

Volume XI, Number 293

Advertisement
Advertisement

October 19, 2021

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

October 18, 2021

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis
Advertisement

Petitions Practice for SNQ Findings in Inter Partes Reexaminations

A prior post emphasized the importance of a well crafted petition in cases where the examiner determines that there is no SNQ in an inter partes reexamination request.  Recall that the BPAI determined it had no jurisdiction to review of a determination that there was no SNQ (for certain claims) in inter partes reexamination control no. 95/001,089 (Belkin International v Optimumpath 95 001089).

An example of a successful petition (3PR petition here) can be found in inter partes reexamination control no. 95/001,461.  On December 20, 2011, the Third Party Requester petitioned the order finding certain proposed SNQs cumulative to issues raised in the ex parte prosecution of the patent (U.S. Patent No. 7,213,762).  The Director of the Central Reexamination Unit granted the petition on January 21, 2011(granted petition).

But note that the Patent Owner filed a “Patent Owner’s Petition to Vacate Director’s Decision” on February 14, 2011.  And the Third Party Requester filed an “Opposition Under 37 CFR 1.182 and 1.183 to Patent Owner’s Petition to Vacate Director’s Decision” on March 11, 2011.  So the Central Reexamination Unit has more petitions on this issue to consider.  Stay tuned!

© 2021 Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A. All Rights Reserved.National Law Review, Volume I, Number 99
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

About this Author

Timothy Bianchi, Schwegman, Patent Attorney
Shareholder

Timothy E. Bianchi is a principal of Schwegman Lundberg & Woessner, P.A. He is active in patent procurement, patent challenges, opinions, due diligence, acquisitions, and patent litigation strategy. Mr. Bianchi represents patent owners and petitioners in inter partes reviews (IPRs) and reexaminations, many of which are involved in concurrent litigation. His background is in medical devices, signal processing, communication electronics, computer hardware, and software.  He has electrical engineering and research experience from employment with IBM, Honeywell, and the University...

612-373-6912
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement