37 CFR 1.172 - Reissue applicant

Cite as37 CFR 1.172
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
11 practice notes
  • Patent cases: Patent business goals; implementation,
    • United States
    • Federal Register October 05, 1998
    • October 5, 1998
    ...is not the inventor, can the client (a potential assignee) take actions allowed an assignee, such as filing a reissue application under 37 CFR 1.172 and submitting a 37 CFR 3.73 statement establishing the right of an assignee to take Assuming the above-noted change to 37 CFR 1.34(b) is made......
  • Rohm & Haas Co. v. Mobil Oil Corp., Civ. A. No. 78-384
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 3th Circuit. United States District Court (Delaware)
    • November 12, 1981
    ...will be rejected as lacking statutory basis for reissue. Id. A reissue proceeding may be initiated only by the holder of the patent, 37 C.F.R. § 1.172, and a party desiring to contest the validity of the patent is assured of only limited participation as a "protestor." 37 C.F.R. § 1.291. A ......
  • Johnson & Johnson, Inc. v. Wallace A. Erickson & Co., No. 79-2483
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (7th Circuit)
    • August 1, 1980
    ...statement that "(a) reissue will be granted to the original patentee, his legal representatives or assigns as the interest may appear." 37 C.F.R. § 1.172. Effective March 1, 1977, the Commissioner amended 37 C.F.R. § 1.175, primarily to add sub-paragraph (a)(4). 42 Fed.Reg. 5588, 5594-95 (J......
  • Bennett, In re, No. 84-778
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
    • June 28, 1985
    ...broadened claims, as the signature of a representative of National Instrument Co. was a necessary part of any reissue application. 37 C.F.R. Sec. 1.172(a). The Board concluded that the substitute declaration by the inventor Bennett, which was filed more than two years after the grant of the......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
10 cases
  • Rohm & Haas Co. v. Mobil Oil Corp., Civ. A. No. 78-384
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 3th Circuit. United States District Court (Delaware)
    • November 12, 1981
    ...will be rejected as lacking statutory basis for reissue. Id. A reissue proceeding may be initiated only by the holder of the patent, 37 C.F.R. § 1.172, and a party desiring to contest the validity of the patent is assured of only limited participation as a "protestor." 37 C.F.R. §......
  • Johnson & Johnson, Inc. v. Wallace A. Erickson & Co., No. 79-2483
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (7th Circuit)
    • August 1, 1980
    ...that "(a) reissue will be granted to the original patentee, his legal representatives or assigns as the interest may appear." 37 C.F.R. § 1.172. Effective March 1, 1977, the Commissioner amended 37 C.F.R. § 1.175, primarily to add sub-paragraph (a)(4). 42 Fed.Reg. 5588, 5594-95 (J......
  • Bennett, In re, No. 84-778
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
    • June 28, 1985
    ...broadened claims, as the signature of a representative of National Instrument Co. was a necessary part of any reissue application. 37 C.F.R. Sec. 1.172(a). The Board concluded that the substitute declaration by the inventor Bennett, which was filed more than two years after the grant of the......
  • U.S. Filter Corp. v. Ionics, Inc., No. CIV. A. 98-10541-REK.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 1st Circuit. United States District Courts. 1st Circuit. District of Massachusetts
    • October 8, 1999
    ...oath must be signed and sworn to by the ... inventors ... and must be accompanied by the written consent of all assignees..." 37 C.F.R. § 1.172. It is also undisputed that plaintiffs did not intend to deceive or defraud the PTO. The core of the parties' dispute is whether the error in ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT