WHIPgroup attorneys successfully appealed obviousness rejections of a patent application directed to an industrial parallel kinematic robot providing a cost-effective and compact manipulator able to cover a large work space. On appeal, WHIPgroup argued “the Examiner is using Appellant’s specification as a roadmap” to piece together the prior art and, further, the Examiner “provides no evidence or reasoning of how a person of skill in the art would make such a modification, or why there is a reason to do so.” The Board agreed with WHIPgroup’s arguments stating that while “it appears that the Examiner has successfully identified where certain teachings can be found in the prior art, [the Examiner] has provided no reason or rationale as to the manner by which such teachings would be combined…, without resorting to impermissible hindsight.” The application is expected to issue in due course.
By Wesley W. Whitmyer, Jr. Not every person is a match for every job. Patents are expensive and complicated legal documents. No less authority than the US Supreme Court noted long ago that “[t]he specification [Read More…]
By William L Birks III In a patent infringement suit, plaintiffs often seek damages for lost sales of infringing products. While this is the most obvious source of recovery, opportunities for larger damage rewards may [Read More…]
WHIPgroup recently made appearances on behalf of client WhitServe LLC in two IPRs brought by Dropbox Inc. The IPRs were filed in response to WhitServe’s patent infringement lawsuit against Dropbox Inc. in the District of Delaware. WhitServe’s U.S. Patent [Read More…]