BLOG
Patent analysis and insight
Analysis and insight to bring more predictability, transparency, and equity to your patent prosecution.
BLOG
Analysis and insight to bring more predictability, transparency, and equity to your patent prosecution.
The USPTO recently hosted a webinar about the general approach to interpreting claims and how the specification interacts with and modifies those claims. With the goal of providing answers to common examiner questions, the webinar specifically discussed the importance of the broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) of each claim, how to handle claim limitations, and the added difficulty of limitations related to 35 USC 112(f) (aka “Means-or-Step-Plus-Function” Limitations). The hope is to create consistent examination guidance that ensures all claims will be interpreted similarly by anyone of ordinary skill in the art.
In June, we marked the fifth anniversary of the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International, 573 U.S. 208 (2014). Far from being settled law, questions of subject matter eligibility have dominated the conversation about patents in the courts, Congress, and the USPTO during the first half of the year. The continued controversy surrounding the Alice case half a decade after it was decided vividly demonstrates its unpopularity and underscores the broad consensus that the time for reform is now.
Elsewhere, the Supreme Court also issued two decisions focusing on provisions of the America Invents Act (AIA), while theft of IP assets by Chinese firms continues to plague U.S. businesses..
In 2013, the USPTO enacted the After Final Consideration Pilot (AFCP) 2.0 program as an alternative response to a final rejection. The goal of the program was to increase communication between examiners and applicants and take those applications that are close to allowance across the finish line, without requiring the time and cost inevitably associated with an RCE.
This precarious position is where Jonathan Miller of Nicholson De Vos Webster & Elliott LLP found himself during a recent prosecution.
Watch our latest video to learn how firms and in-house teams can shape strategy with big data during all parts of the prosecution process.
Due to inconsistent interpretation, preparing for and responding to Alice rejections has become one of the most stressful aspects of patent prosecution. Rejections citing Alice have multiplied exponentially since the initial decision on June 19, 2014, and they now account for more than 60% of §101 rejections and more than 8% of all rejections, as of our latest analysis.
Patent prosecution is complex – we know. If you’re ready for simpler workflows and more predictable outcomes, give us a call.