Home.      Case Law FAQ Home       


Miscellaneous Practice Issues

1.1:  Third party contact with examiners.
Abandonment, Unintentional Delay, Unavoidable Delay
2.1:  Inequitable Conduct and claiming unintentional delay.
2.2 Intentional revival as defense to infringement

3.1:  How to challenge denied petitions. .




1.1:  Is it improper to call an examiner to advise him of prior art in a case you are not party to? 
CAFC, 2011, Radio Systems v. Accession
  Well, not sure.  See PatObv on this, Apr26.2011.     

Abandonment, Unintentional delay, Unavoidable delay

2.1:  Is unintentional delay delay that was negligent or delay that was not intended as delay.  Is it IC to say seek revival on unintentional delay where the total delay was not unintentional?
Not sure I know.  See the May12.2001 PatObv Aristocrat article below.

2.2:  If the application was improperly revived, is the patent invalid?
See PatentlyO May 12, 2011 Aristocrat v. IGT.


3.1: What recourse do you have when petition is denied? 
First, you cannot appeal to BPAI.  Star Fruits [393 F3d 1277 (CAFC 2005)] sued PTO in USDC E.D. Va. under APA for abuse of discretion.  The appeal goes to CAFC. Fat chance, the PTO's decision must be arbitrary and capricious to be over-turned.  .  .

Back to Top of Page







Back to Top of Page


Back to Top of Page