WHIPgroup Successfully obtained patent allowance with an Appeal Brief. The invention is directed to an agitator ball mill, and has cams with specific ratios that improve mixing, cooling, and durability. The Patent Office rejected all claims on the basis that the specification allegedly failed to support “criticality” of the claimed ratios and that they allegedly would have been the result of routine optimization. WHIPgroup filed an Appeal Brief arguing that the claimed ratios provide benefits over the prior art and that the Patent Office used improper hindsight to reject the claims without evidence. Rather than Answer the Appeal Brief, the Patent Office issued a Notice of Allowance for all pending claims. Accordingly, allowance was secured by WHIPgroup without the need to file a Reply Brief or a Request for Continued Examination (RCE).
Earlier this month WHIPgroup asked the Supreme Court to take up the important issue of whether a court can overlook factual allegations in a patentee’s infringement complaint at the pleading stage and find that the [Read More…]
WHIPgroup successfully argued two applications before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) and obtained favorable decisions reversing written description and obviousness rejections. Both applications relate to a novel firearm cartridge that is designed to [Read More…]
By Stephen F.W. Ball and Benjamin N. Luehrs You might think litigation, especially complex litigation like patent litigation, decreases in times of economic turbulence. History shows the opposite. This is somewhat intuitive because, in [Read More…]