WHIPgroup attorneys successfully appealed an obviousness rejection for a patent application directed to a medical instrument with a touch screen movable between a first position within a housing footprint and a second position extended from the housing footprint. WHIPgroup argued that the cited reference had been misinterpreted by the Examiner and in fact showed a touch screen with a different type of movement. The Board agreed with WHIPgroup’s arguments, stating that they “could not find any portion in [the cited reference], and the Examiner has not cited to any portion, to support [the Examiner’s interpretation].” The Board thus reversed the obviousness rejection.
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…]