Digital Commons Network^™

5 U.S.C. § 553: Patent Elephants In Process Mouseholes, Thomas G. Field

The University of New Hampshire Law Review

[Excerpt] “As the district court in Tafas v. Duda (Tafas I) recounted, in 2006, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) proposed to limit numbers of continuing patent applications, requests for continued examination, and claims that could be made as a matter of right. In 2007, following notice and comment procedures that generated hundreds of comments, many critical, the USPTO published final rules consonant with those objectives.

The district court in Tafas I issued a preliminary injunction and ultimately rejected those rules, saying “[b]ecause the USPTO’s rulemaking authority under 35 U.S.C. § 2(b)(2) does not extend to substantive rules, and …

The Unreasonableness Of The Patent Office's 'Broadest Reasonable Interpretation' Standard, Christopher A. Cotropia

Law Faculty Publications

This article does what is long overdue: it fully explores the validity of the BRI standard. The previously articulated rationales behind the BRI standard are severely lacking. Not only does the BRI standard fail to provide the advantages touted by the courts that created the standard, the standard is contrary to both the patent statutes and the concept of a unitary patent system. It allows examiners to avoid difficult claim interpretation issues; it leads to improper and uncorrectable denials of patent protection; and it is incurably ambiguous. Given that the BRI standard is severely lacking, the courts and the USPTO …

Modernizing Patent Law's Inequitable Conduct Doctrine, Christopher A. Cotropia

Law Faculty Publications

This Article's main finding is that the inequitable conduct doctrine has the ability to improve patent quality as long as the inherent tendency to overcomply with the doctrine by overloading the USPTO with information is kept in check. The Article reaches this conclusion by proceeding in five parts. Part II describes the current thinking on the inequitable conduct doctrine, with particular focus on the major critiques of the doctrine and proposed legislative and administrative responses. Part III of the Article begins the construction of a fundamental, conceptual framework for the doctrine by explaining how it impacts both patent quality and …

Ending The Patent Monopoly, Michael B. Abramowicz, John H. Duffy

GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works

For nearly two centuries, an inventor applying for a U.S. patent has been required to obtain the opinion of an expert who has searched the prior art and determined that the inventor’s application meets the standards of patentability. And for nearly two centuries, those expert opinions could be obtained only from a single office run by the U.S. government. The patenting monopoly, which is almost certainly undesirable, is now being eroded. Rising global trade and technological sophistication have increased the number of patent filings in every country; government patent offices here and abroad are thus being driven to rely on …