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.
Recently, WHIPGROUP engaged in an arbitration that included a five day hearing in the City. Here are some thoughts about why arbitration is different (not clearly better or worse) than litigation. Venue The AAA arbitral [Read More…]
WHIPGroup previously filed a Motion to Dismiss a patent infringement suit filed against its client TomTom in the Western District of Texas. Rather than opposing WHIPGroup’s motion to dismiss, Plaintiff MDSP Technologies LLC voluntarily dismissed [Read More…]
WHIPgroup succeeded in having anticipation and indefiniteness rejections overturned by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). The claimed invention relates to a sequencing station that manages both sequencing and restacking tasks. The Examiner had [Read More…]