WHIPgroup attorneys obtained allowance of an application directed to a control system for a melting and refining process. The application had received a Final Office Action that rejected the claims as obvious over a patent by the same inventors. WHIPgroup filed a Post-Prosecution Pilot (P3) Program request and argued that the prior art failed to disclose the specific programming of the control unit that improves prior methods. The P3 Panel was persuaded by WHIPgroup’s arguments and the case was allowed without the need for an RCE or Appeal.
WHIPgroup attorneys successfully appealed an obviousness rejection for a patent application directed to a flexible medical instrument. WHIPgroup argued that one skilled in the art would not appreciate the prior art’s “pinion and rack gears” [Read More…]
By Benjamin N. Luehrs and Hao Zhang Inter Partes Review (IPR) is an effective procedure for invalidating a competitor’s patent whereby a petitioner cites other patents and printed publications (i.e., “prior art”) to argue that [Read More…]
By Hao Zhang and Patrick D. Duplessis U.S. inventors seeking to protect their IP rights worldwide often file foreign patent applications in markets where they conduct business or where they are likely to find infringers [Read More…]