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.
Under U.S. law, anyone who uses a system that is likely to have been made by a patented process, and who does not demonstrate that the system was not made by the patented process, is [Read More…]
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…]