Search for: "EX PARTE HOLDER" Results 1 - 20 of 820
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
26 Aug 2010, 3:10 am by Scott A. McKeown
On Tuesday, the BPAI seemingly ended the 10 year saga of Ex Parte Gary E. [read post]
20 Aug 2010, 3:10 am by Scott A. McKeown
Estoppel of 35 USC § 317(b) Applies Only to Inter Partes Patent Reexamination One of the risks often associated with ex parte patent reexamination is that an outcome favorable to a patent holder is considered to “gold plate” a patent that is later asserted against the requester in district court, especially with respect to the same or similar art. [read post]
3 Feb 2011, 3:10 am by Scott A. McKeown
Request Ex Parte Patent Reexamination, Lose, Repeat For Patent Owners, one of the more frustrating aspects of ex parte patent reexamination is that the experience can be never ending. [read post]
23 Sep 2010, 3:10 am by Scott A. McKeown
New Ex Parte Patent Reexamination Pilot Program a Tough Sell Back in August, I reported on a new USPTO pilot program designed to decrease pendency in ex parte patent reexamination by seeking waiver of the right to file a Patent Owner Statement. [read post]
24 Apr 2012, 2:39 am by Jim Singer
 If the USPTO orders an ex parte reexamination, an additional fee of $16,120 will be required. [read post]
11 Mar 2012, 9:03 pm by Steve Vladeck
It is the best insurance for the Government itself against those blunders which leave lasting stains on a system of justice but which are bound to occur on ex parte consideration. [read post]
22 Nov 2010, 9:59 pm by Patent Docs
Patent and Trademark Office announced that it was seeking comments regarding a proposal to incentivize the creation and distribution of humanitarian technologies by offering fast-track ex parte reexamination vouchers to patent holders "demonstrating humanitarian uses of patented technologies" (see "USPTO Looking for Ways to Incentivize Humanitarian Technologies"). [read post]
14 Nov 2022, 7:37 am by Y. Michael Yin, JD
The post How Court Treats Post Separation Payments, Part 1 appeared first on North Carolina Divorce Lawyers Blog. [read post]
31 Jul 2018, 3:55 pm by Shahram Miri
"Estate of Post (2018) _____ Cal.App.4th _____  The trial court ruled in favor of the policy holder's sons but the ex-spouse appealed and prevailed. [read post]
14 Jun 2009, 3:16 pm
  In Holder, Court considered whether a court  has authority under MCR 6.429(A) to  modify a sentence that it determines is invalid  ex parte. [read post]
15 Sep 2021, 12:16 pm by Howard Wasserman
The piece I find interesting begins around p. 24, in which DOJ argues, in essence, that § 1983 and Ex parte Young preempt a law such as this. [read post]
30 May 2012, 4:40 pm by Mandour & Associates
IPNews® - Apple and Facebook have recently faced ex parte challenges with the USPTO for invalidation of patents. [read post]
8 Nov 2011, 4:55 am by Pamela
Coiro accused the bank of turning a profit by freezing joint accounts without prior notice, a practice she called equivalent to the bank’s granting itself “ex parte restraining orders on the funds of innocent third parties”. [read post]
30 May 2012, 4:20 pm
Alternatively, the USPTO can decide to issue an ex parte challenge independent of a third party filer. [read post]
6 Dec 2011, 1:17 pm by Scott A. McKeown
USPTO statistics for 2011 are found (here) Ex parte patent reexamination proceedings are typically disfavored over inter partes reexamination proceedings as being too one-sided, and historically biased in favor of patent holders. [read post]
2 Sep 2021, 7:53 am by Jen Sgroi
The client should do a new will, and if part of the existing plan, revise a trust to take the ex-spouse out of the documents. [read post]
6 Mar 2012, 9:19 am by Tom Parker
He began by asserting, as the Supreme Court found in ex parte Quirin, that citizenship did not protect a US national from the consequences of his belligerency. [read post]
22 Sep 2010, 3:10 am by Scott A. McKeown
 The notice requests comments from the public on a newly proposed enhancement to ex parte patent reexamination that would allow certain Patent Holders to advance to the head of the USPTO line. [read post]