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” teach the “torsion shaft” of the claimed invention because of their linear motion and inflexibility. The Board agreed with WHIPgroup’s arguments, stating that “the Examiner has not provided an adequate reasoning with a rational underpinning” to modify the cited references to reach the claimed invention. The Board thus reversed the obviousness rejection.
By William L. Birks “The court in exceptional cases may award reasonable attorney fees to the prevailing party.” 35 U.S.C. § 285 While every prevailing party would seek attorney fees if they could, it’s important [Read More…]
By Patrick D. Duplessis As we recently reported, the Arterton Inn of Court held its first substantive event on the 2018-2019 session, and WHIPgroup attorneys played a major role in preparing the event. The event, [Read More…]
By Lauren C. Matturri In December 2018 toy company MGA Entertainment Inc. filed a declaratory judgment against Louis Vuitton. This was to preempt the French fashion house from claiming MGA Entertainment’s Pooey Puitton toy was [Read More…]