Patent community stunned by CAFC ruling (full version)
23 March 2009
Eileen McDermott, New York
In a decision said to be “creating a shockwave through the patent community”, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has reversed a lower court’s finding that the USPTO does not have the authority to promulgate its final rules package on patent claims and continuations
In April 2008, a district court granted GlaxoSmithKline’s and inventor Triantafyllos Tafas’ motion for summary judgment in its case seeking to enjoin the Office’s patent claims and continuing applications rules package. Judge James Cacheris of the US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia said in his opinion that the proposed rules were substantive, rather than procedural, and that the Office did not have the authority to implement them.
In May, the Office officially filed a Notice of Appeal with the CAFC.
Several attorneys who attended the oral arguments in December 2008 told Managing IP that the Court seemed receptive to GSK and Tafas’ arguments and that they expected the appeal to be dismissed. But in a majority opinion authored by Judge Sharon Prost, the Court found all but one of the Final Rules valid and disagreed with Cacheris’ view that they were substantive...
Only subscribers have complete access to Managing IP Magazine,
log in or
subscribe now.
Alternatively take a
free trial, giving you 48-hour access to Managing IP Magazine (some articles and surveys may be excluded).
Subscribe Now
This article is available to subscribers. Please click subscribe to read the rest of the article.
Subscribe
Take a free trial
Please take a free 48-hour trial to gain limited access. Some articles and surveys may be excluded.
Take a free trial