We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
Lexology logo
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-4 of 4

Federal Circuit significantly tightens the standard for proving inequitable conduct in Therasense, Inc. v. Becton, Dickinson and C

  • Nutter McClennen & Fish LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 26 2011

On Wednesday, the Federal Circuit, sitting en banc, substantially raised the bar for proving inequitable conduct in patent cases with its much-anticipated decision in Therasense, Inc. v. Becton, Dickinson and Co., Nova Biomedical Corp. and Bayer Healthcare LLC

New U.S. Patent and Trademark Office rule allows small entities to abandon one application to move another towards the front of the line

  • Nutter McClennen & Fish LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • January 22 2010

In an effort to reduce the backlog of patent applications, the USPTO has created a temporary additional basis under which a small entity applicant may have an application accorded special status for examination

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences reevaluates eligibility for patent reissue

  • Nutter McClennen & Fish LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • January 22 2010

In only their fourth precedential decision of 2009, the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (BPAI) in Ex Parte Tanaka (December 9, 2009, Appeal No. 2009-000234) considered permissible bases under 35 U.S.C. 251 for a patent to be eligible for reissue

Means-plus-function claims revisited by the board of patent appeals and interferences

  • Nutter McClennen & Fish LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • January 22 2010

Late last year in Ex Parte Rodriguez (October 1, 2009, Appeal No. 2008-000693), the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (BPAI) ruled that a claim in means-plus-function format was invalid under 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph, as being indefinite because structure other than a computer, i.e., an algorithm, was not provided in the specification for performing claimed functions