IP Review Online
IP News by RSS
Client Services - Media Centre - Careers - Contact Us -

 

  • CPA Global
    Contact Us
    Media Centre
    Careers
    Events
    History
    Strategic Partners
    Our Offices
  • Articles by Subject
    Copyright
    Domains
    IP Strategy
    Legal Outsourcing
    Lighter Side
    Patents
    Software
    Trademarks
  • Articles by Industry
    Electronics
    Finance
    Food & Beverages
    Intellectual Property
    Internet
    Legal & Regulatory
    Legal Outsourcing
    Manufacturing
    Media & Entertainment
    Pharma & Biotech
  • Notes and Quotes
  • Interviews
  • IP Resources
    Industry Interviews
    Subscribe to IP Review
    About CPA Global
    White Papers
    Past Issues
    IP News by RSS
IP Review Online

Useful Links

Articles by Subject
Copyright
Domains
IP Strategy
Legal Outsourcing
Lighter Side
Patents
Software
Trademarks

Articles by Industry
Electronics
Finance
Food & Beverages
Intellectual Property
Internet
Legal & Regulatory
Legal Outsourcing
Manufacturing
Media & Entertainment
Pharma & Biotech

IP Resources

Industry Interviews

Subscribe to IP Review today

About CPA Global

White Papers

Past Issues

IP News by RSS

Latest IP Review Online Stories

Rule tweak quells patentee panic

11 August 2008 | Intellectual Property
RSS Feed Icon Bookmark Icon

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) announced on 7 August that it will adjust the retroactive element of a clause in its Claims and Continuation Final Rule, in response to widespread criticism from firms with large patent portfolios. Published last year, the rule stipulated that patentees would have to provide lists of related applications in their filings, plus statements of why those applications were not claiming the same invention. Filing documents were also required to be shorter.

Concerns over the mounting patent backlog prompted the rule, but the Patent Office was soon litigated by major firms that feared the potential financial implications – in labour terms – of re-filing past patents. First to litigate was GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), controller of a vast array of interrelated patents for drugs and household goods. In October 2007, a major ally arrived in the form of the American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA), which filed an amicus curiae brief backing GSK’s move to force an injunction on the clause. The AIPLA brief was, in turn, backed by IBM, who signed a declaration of support. Since then, the USPTO rule has been effectively frozen.

The injunction will remain in place pending the resolution of the USPTO’s appeal in the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. In the meantime, however, the USPTO has rethought the rule’s content and altered the retroactive element in favour of an as-yet undecided, future-effective date. USPTO deputy director, Margaret Peterlin, said in a statement: ‘Our primary duties are to ensure quality and efficiency. This change to the applicability dates, while delaying aspects of the rule’s quality and efficiency effects, should allay some concerns regarding applicant requirements in the interim.’

  • Top of article
  • -
  • IP Review Online home
  • -
  • Latest IP News by RSS
  • -
  • Social bookmark this article:
  • Bookmark Icon
© Copyright CPA Global Limited 2010

  • Site Map
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms and Conditions