WHIPgroup attorney Robert Keeler was recently interviewed and quoted in a Law360 article regarding motions to exclude evidence in IPR proceedings. Confronted with the question of why litigants continue to file motions to exclude despite low chances of success, Mr. Keeler explained that the additional chance to highlight evidentiary weaknesses and convince the Board to give evidence little or no weight makes these motions worthwhile.
By Stephen F.W. Ball, Jr. Motions to dismiss, also called 12(b)(6) motions, have been used to eviscerate patent rights on the basis that a patent is allegedly directed to an “abstract concept” and thus lacks [Read More…]
WHIPgroup obtained another patent allowance using the After Final Consideration Pilot (AFCP) Program. In U.S. Application No. 15/239,469 directed to an eccentric well pipe, a Final Office Action rejected pending claims for obviousness. WHIPgroup attorneys [Read More…]
WHIPgroup attorneys were successful in using the Pre-Appeal Brief Review program to overcome a final rejection. During prosecution, the USPTO rejected claims directed to a method for actively damping oscillations in a compression process as [Read More…]