Slashdot Mirror


User: cjma82

cjma82's activity in the archive.

Stories
0
Comments
3
First seen
Last seen
Profile
(view on slashdot.org)

Comments · 3

  1. Re:Patentees usually want delay on USPTO New Accelerated Review Process · · Score: 1

    This is a misinterpretation regarding motivation. The patent duration runs from the grant date, but the 20-year term starts running down from the date of filing. Inequitable conduct is almost always raised in litigation and the practitioner preparing/filing the application also has a duty of candor any prior art material to patentability. A presumption that a thorough search could weigh heavily to show the applicant intended to deceive the USPTO, invalidating the entire patent, not just the particular claims disclosed.

  2. Re:Free Prior Art Verification Service on USPTO New Accelerated Review Process · · Score: 2, Informative

    A pilot program for that idea has already been initiated:
    http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/11/03/00 23220&from=rss

  3. Re:prior art searching on USPTO New Accelerated Review Process · · Score: 1

    I agree with the poster and am currently working on a paper regarding this topic.

    For those interested in a non USPTO view of the process this article is available at:
    http://www.ktvb.com/news/localnews/stories/ktvbn-m ar1607-micron_patent.1ab55ce3.html.

    According to the article in the approximately 200 days since the program began and the date of the article, only 236 requests were filed.

    The problems with the program are that it not only increases the risks of a finding a invalidity for an entire patent due to inequitable conduct, it also can limit the scope of patent protection as well as greatly increasing the costs of preparing the application (3x-5x).