Third-party art, supplemental exam debated at USPTO roadshow
17 February 2012
Patrick Ross, Washington DC
Attendees of the USPTO’s first roadshow on implementation of the America Invents Act expressed concerns about supplemental examination and pre-issuance submissions of prior art, among other topics
One audience member wondered if the agency had considered the fact that a supplemental examination filing "seems very onerous and dangerous, as the patent owner is going to have to provide a road map on how to attack their patent". He said he suspected that, in the wake of Therasense v Becton, Dickinson & Co, there would be few such filings.
"If Therasense was decided three or four years ago, one wonders if this would have even been put in the statute," Bahr acknowledged. "We did consider all of the requirements to have or not to have," he said, arguing not much is required. "Just tell us what's in your document that makes it of interest, under what statutory basis," he said.
Acting commissioner for patent examination policy Drew Hirshfeld touched on an issue that has raised some questions...
Only subscribers have complete access to Managing Patents,
log in or
subscribe now.
Alternatively take a
free trial, giving you 48-hour access to Managing Patents (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