37 CFR 41.8 - Mandatory notices
| Cite as | 37 CFR 41.8 |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
58 practice notes
-
University of Western Australia v. Academisch Ziekenhuis Leiden, Patent Interference 106
...that a party seeking judicial review timely promptly serve notice on the Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (37 C.F.R. § 41.8(b)) and file a copy of the notice in the record of this interference.; and FURTHER ORDERED that attention is directed to Biogen Idec MA, Inc.,......
-
Mojave Desert Holdings, LLC v. Crocs, Inc., 2020-1167
...did not file its submission "within 20 days of any change [of the real party-in-interest] during the proceeding," as required by 37 C.F.R. § 41.8(a), making it untimely. J.A. 180.The first and second grounds appear to be the same. Based on these grounds, the Board considered Mojave's petiti......
-
Mojave Desert Holdings, LLC v. Crocs, Inc., 2020-1167
...did not file its submission "within 20 days of any change [of the real party-in-interest] during the proceeding," as required by 37 C.F.R. § 41.8(a), making it untimely. J.A. 180.The first and second grounds appear to be the same. Based on these grounds, the Board considered Mojave's petiti......
-
EcoServices LLC v. Lufthansa Technik Ag, Patent Interference 106
...review timely serve notice on the Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office; 37 C.F.R. §§ 90.1 and 104.2. See also 37 C.F.R. § 41.8(b). Attention is directed to Biogen Idec MA, Inc., v. Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, 785 F.3d 648, 654-57 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (determini......
Request a trial to view additional results
53 cases
-
University of Western Australia v. Academisch Ziekenhuis Leiden, Patent Interference 106
...that a party seeking judicial review timely promptly serve notice on the Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (37 C.F.R. § 41.8(b)) and file a copy of the notice in the record of this interference.; and FURTHER ORDERED that attention is directed to Biogen Idec MA, Inc.,......
-
Mojave Desert Holdings, LLC v. Crocs, Inc., 2020-1167
...not file its submission "within 20 days of any change [of the real party-in-interest] during the proceeding," as required by 37 C.F.R. § 41.8(a), making it untimely. J.A. 180.The first and second grounds appear to be the same. Based on these grounds, the Board considered Mojave's ......
-
Mojave Desert Holdings, LLC v. Crocs, Inc., 2020-1167
...not file its submission "within 20 days of any change [of the real party-in-interest] during the proceeding," as required by 37 C.F.R. § 41.8(a), making it untimely. J.A. 180.The first and second grounds appear to be the same. Based on these grounds, the Board considered Mojave's ......
-
EcoServices LLC v. Lufthansa Technik Ag, Patent Interference 106
...review timely serve notice on the Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office; 37 C.F.R. §§ 90.1 and 104.2. See also 37 C.F.R. § 41.8(b). Attention is directed to Biogen Idec MA, Inc., v. Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, 785 F.3d 648, 654-57 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (determini......
Request a trial to view additional results
5 firm's commentaries
-
Latest Federal Court Cases - February 2021 #2
...face included the rights in the Board proceeding.” Second, the Court rejected Crocs’ argument that Mojave’s motion was untimely under 37 C.F.R. § 41.8(a) because Mojave waited nearly a year after the assignment before filing the motion to substitute. The Court rejected this argument as well......
-
Federal Circuit Review - February 2021
...Mojave lacked standing in the reexamination, and the petition was not timely filed within the 20-day period found in 37 C.F.R. § 41.8(a). The PTAB reversed the examiner’s rejection of Crocs’s patent, and U.S.A. Dawgs The Federal Circuit reversed the PTAB decision on substitution, holding th......
-
If You Buy the Whole Company, You Can Fight Its Legal Battles
...Mojave lacked standing in the reexamination, and the petition was not timely filed within the 20-day period found in 37 C.F.R. § 41.8(a). The PTAB reversed the examiner’s rejection of Crocs’s patent, and U.S.A. Dawgs The Federal Circuit reversed the PTAB decision on substitution, holding th......
-
Old Dawg, New Tricks: Bankruptcy Successor Is Also Inter Partes Re-Exam Successor
...the real party-in-interest. Mojave did not file its submission within 20 days of any change of the real party-in-interest as required by 37 CFR § 41.8(a). Subsequently, the Board reversed the examiner’s rejection of Crocs’ patent claim, which decision Dawgs appealed to the Federal Circuit, ......
Request a trial to view additional results