WHIPgroup attorneys successfully used the Pre-Appeal Program to advance prosecution of a case directed to a robot control system. The application discusses problems in the prior art where fast robot movements can occur and cause serious injuries to an operator. The claimed invention addresses this by setting a voltage limit on a DC-bus. The application received a Final Office Action rejecting the claims based on multiple references. WHIPgroup attorneys argued that the prior art does not set any limit, but only measures a deviation (e.g., after it has happened) so that it may initiate an alert. In addition, WHIPgroup attorneys argued that the Examiner’s reliance on inherency throughout the Final Office Action was error as a matter of law. A Pre-Appeal panel agreed with WHIPgroup’s arguments and prosecution was reopened without the need for an Appeal Brief or RCE.
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…]