WHIPgroup attorneys obtain favorable decision using the Post-Prosecution Pilot (P3) Program for a case directed to an electric battery recharging plant. After receiving a final rejection, WHIPgroup presented arguments to a P3 Panel asserting that the cited art failed to disclose the claimed configuration of an electrical connector providing delayed connection of a battery in parallel with a storage capacitor within a switching cell of a voltage source converter. The P3 Panel agreed with WHIPgroup’s arguments and withdrew the prior art rejections.
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” [Read More…]
By Benjamin N. Luehrs and Hao Zhang Inter Partes Review (IPR) is an effective procedure for invalidating a competitor’s patent whereby a petitioner cites other patents and printed publications (i.e., “prior art”) to argue that [Read More…]
By Hao Zhang and Patrick D. Duplessis U.S. inventors seeking to protect their IP rights worldwide often file foreign patent applications in markets where they conduct business or where they are likely to find infringers [Read More…]