Friday, 9 October 2009

Continuation patent Applications: USPTO and GSK settled patent litigation

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) announced (in a press release Here ) that it has filed a joint motion with pharma giant GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) to dismiss the lawsuit related to continuation rules.

Background of the case

Earlier in August 2007, The USPTO published new rules to improve patent prosecution and examination. However, contentious rules on Final Rule 114 (requests for continued examination), Final Rule 75 (claims), and Final Rule 265 (examination support documents) were opposed.

After the said notification, an inventor Dr. Triantafyllos Tafas and GSK (and others) opposed said rule and filed complaint in U.S. District Court of the Eastern District of Virginia. Later in April, 2008 the district court sided with GSK, subsequently, USPTO appealed against said decision in U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC).


On March 20, 2009, the CAFC issued a decision addressing:
a) whether the Claims and Continuation Final Rules fall within the scope of the USPTO’s rulemaking authority and
b) whether the Final Rules are contrary to the Patent Act.


The Court opined that the Final Rules were all within the agency’s rulemaking authority. The Court also concluded that Final Rule 114 (requests for continued examination), Final Rule 75 (claims), and Final Rule 265 (examination support documents) are consistent with the Patent Act, but that Final Rule 78 (continuations) violates the Patent Act. The Court remanded several issues to the district court.

In 2009, the Federal Circuit granted rehearing en banc, and ordered additional briefing that would have commenced in the coming weeks.

No comments:

web page statistics
Disclaimer: "IP Pharma Doc" blog is published for information purpose only. "IP Pharma Doc" blog contains no legal advice. I assume no legal responsibility for the views/information expressed here. “IP Pharma Doc” blog is my personal website and not edited by my employer, accordingly, no part of my blog should be attributed to my employer. All information on the present blog should be double checked for its accuracy and applicability. © Dr. Sarwal (2007)
 
eXTReMe Tracker