Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Intellectual Property Law Blogs -> FileWrapper

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Intellectual Property Law

: FileWrapper

Federal Circuit invalidates Patent on Nobel-Prize winning invention after 50 years of prosecution

By McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C.

ADVERTISEMENTS

In an appeal from the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences, the Federal Circuit affirmed the Board's rejection of the claims based upon obviousness-type double patenting over previously-granted related patents. The technical aspects of the invention are complex, but are overshadowed by the procedural aspects of this reexamination. The majority and dissenting opinions seem to discuss two different cases. The majority holds the double patenting issue was available in the reexamination under the former § 303 (in part because the rejection at issue was made after the amendment), and the dissent holds the reexamination improper because the issue was previously considered. The majority holds the expert declarations unpersuasive, but the dissent considers them unrebutted. In the end, the rejections are affirmed, even though the patents covered an invention that resulted in a Nobel Prize to one of the inventors.

More detail of In re Basell Poliolefine Italia S.P.A. after the jump.

[More]

Full post as published by FileWrapper on December 16, 2008 (boomark / email).