The invention is directed to a trocar assembly for minimally invasive surgery. The application received a final office action rejecting all claims for being anticipated by three different references. WHIPgroup filed an Appeal and argued that the cited art operates in different ways to achieve different results, and that Applicant’s unique structure was not found in the prior art. WHIPgroup also argued that the Examiner had a made an unreasonably broad claim interpretation that was inconsistent with Applicant’s specification. After oral argument the Board reversed the rejections and allowed the claims.
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…]
WHIPgroup succeeded in having anticipation and indefiniteness rejections overturned by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). The claimed invention relates to a sequencing station that manages both sequencing and restacking tasks. The Examiner had [Read More…]