Law Commons^™

Open Letter To Director David Kappos Of The United States Patent And Trademark Office, Kenneth L. Port

Faculty Scholarship

I appreciate the opportunity to respond to the Request for Comments on the extent to which small businesses may be harmed by litigation tactics by corporations‟ attempts to enforce trademark rights beyond a reasonable interpretation of the scope of the rights granted to the trademark owner; the best use of Government services to protect trademarks and prevent counterfeiting; and appropriate policy recommendations.

The PTO should be commended for considering whether the use of trademark litigation as a form of “bullying” is a problem for the U.S. trademark system. While some consider trademark litigation as a justifiable effort to police marks …

Commentary: Authority Of The Commissioner Over The Board Of Patent Appeals And Interferences, R. Carl Moy

Faculty Scholarship

On August 3, 1992, the United States Patent and Trademark Office published a notice in the Federal Register requesting public comments on the PTO's appeal procedures. Taken in context, then, the notice can be fairly said to raise the issue whether, under the existing statute, the Board is subservient to the Commissioner. It also raises the broader question of whether such a subservient arrangement is desirable or, alternatively, whether the statute should be modified if necessary to give the Board decisional independence from the Commissioner. This Commentary is directed primarily to this latter point. In summary, it concludes that the …

The Effect Of New Rule 56 On The Law Of Inequitable Conduct, R. Carl Moy

Faculty Scholarship

This article discusses Rule 56 of the Patent and Trademark Office. Part II discusses changes from the old to the new Rule 56, and examines the former’s relationship to the law of inequitable conduct. Part III elaborates on the current status of the PTO’s rulemaking efforts, and Part IV is focused on the new Rule under the APA. Parts V and VI are about new Rule 56 as a hortatory statement and common-law jurisprudential limitations, respectively. The author ultimately concludes that the PTO could have chosen to approach the Federal Circuit as an amicus without a prior rulemaking proceeding. That …

Judicial Deference To The Pto's Interpretations Of The Patent Law, R. Carl Moy

Faculty Scholarship

This article attempts to provide a basis upon which to preserve the Federal Circuit's current lawmaking primacy. Given the large body of preexisting literature on Chevron, USA, Inc v. Natural Resources Defense Council, it does not address whether Chevron allocates power between agencies and the courts optimally. Rather, the article examines how the PTO's statutory interpretations should be reviewed under Chevron. In Section I, the article places the examination in context by describing the Chevron decision and its general implications. Section II of the article examines how Chevron should be applied specifically in the context of reviewing statutory interpretations of …

The Interpretation Of Means Expressions During Prosecution, R. Carl Moy

Faculty Scholarship

This article briefly explains how the scope of a claim including a means expression is determined both under the PTO view and a strict application of the statutory language. The lack of consensus and current state of the law in the area are illustrated through an analysis of several recent decisions of the Federal Circuit. The policies underlying the PTO and statutory methods of interpreting means expressions during prosecution are examined in an effort to demonstrate that the statutory method more effectively furthers the policies underlying the patent system.