37 C.F.R. §41.61 - Notice of appeal and cross appeal to Board
| Cite as | 37 C.F.R. §41.61 |
-
- 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
32 cases
-
Angiodynamics, Inc. v. Patent of C.R. Bard, Inc., Appeal 2015-004554
...rejecting unamended claims 1-20 of the '022 patent. (Patent Owner's Notice of Appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134, 37 C.F.R. § 1.959 and 37 C.F.R. § 41.61, " dated November 18, 2013). The Examiner's findings and conclusions are stated in a "Right of Appeal Notice, " mailed October 18, 2013 ("RAN")......
-
Angiodynamics, Inc. v. Patent of C.R. Bard, Inc., Appeal 2015-004506
...rejecting unamended claims 1-10 of the '615 patent. ("Patent Owner's Notice of Appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134, 37 C.F.R. § 1.959 and 37 C.F.R. § 41.61, " dated December 16, 2013). Claim 11 is not subject to reexamination in this proceeding. (See "Patent Owner's Appeal Brief under 35 U.S.C. § ......
-
Angiodynamics, Inc. v. Patent of C.R. Bard, Inc., Appeal 2015-001533
...rejecting unamended claims 1-10 of the '302 patent. (Patent Owner's Notice of Appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134, 37 C.F.R. § 1.959 and 37 C.F.R. § 41.61, " dated November 4, 2013). The Examiner's findings and conclusions are stated in a "Right of Appeal Notice, " mailed October 4, 2013.[2] The P......
-
Oracle America, Inc. v. Netapp, Inc., Appeal 2012-009493
...§305 or any particular proposed rejection(s) based on 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 or 103, instead merely citing unspecified "art of record." 37 C.F.R. § 41.61(b)(2) provides that a requester "may file a notice of cross appeal with respect to any . . . final determination not to make a proposed rejecti......
Request a trial to view additional results
7 firm's commentaries
-
USPTO Proposes Overhaul to Patent Reexamination Proceedings
...41.37, 41.43)Yes—1.550(c)No.Extension of time to file a notice of appeal or brief on appeal by any party in inter partes reexam (see 37 CFR 41.61, 41.66)Yes—1.183No.Striking another party’s improper paper (or portion thereof) from the fileYes—1.181Yes.Protection of proprietary information b......
-
On Inter Partes Reexamination, The Board Lacks Jurisdiction To Consider Arguments Based On References Determined By The Director As Not Raising A Substantial New Question Of Patentability
...that because there had been no final decision on patentability regarding the three references, appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 315(b) and 37 C.F.R. § 41.61 was unavailable. Belkin appealed the Board's decision to the Federal "To allow an otherwise non-appealable decision by the Director to become ......
-
Prosecution History Of Original Examination As Intrinsic Evidence In Post-Grant Proceedings
...because Tempo did not file a cross-appeal raising those arguments. The Federal Circuit clarified that the relevant regulation 37 C.F.R. § 41.61(b), which provides that "a requester who has not filed a notice of appeal may file a notice of cross appeal with respect to any final decision favo......
-
Examiners May Not Rely On Extrinsic Dictionary Definitions Inconsistent With Intrinsic Evidence For Claim Construction
...also held that the Board's refusal to consider Tempo's alternative arguments on appeal rested on a clearly erroneous interpretation of 37 C.F.R. § 41.61(b), which states that "a requester who has not filed a notice of appeal may file a notice of cross appeal with respect to any final decisi......
Request a trial to view additional results