This case illustrates not only how methods with mental steps can survive an Alice rejection at the PTAB, but also an overall strategy for handling cases landing on the desk of an examiner determined to make life difficult for the applicant.

The PTAB confirms that it is improper to reject distinct claim limitations of a claimed method with the same single element in the cited reference.

It is easy to contravene the prohibition against individually attacking references used in an obviousness combination. This post dissects the issues and proposes a few ways to reduce the ability of the USPTO to simply dismiss your arguments.

Honda is forced to appeal a rejection that fails to pass the red face test.

Be careful when arguing functional language on appeal if the prior art’s structure matches your own.

Oral Arguments in the Mohawk IPR Case.

An important case that provides several practice tips in ex parte appeals before the USPTO PTAB.

Functional claim language must be considered, even under anticipation.

Review an example PTAB decision illustrating how recent case law is having a major impact on whether rejections relying on broad, but unreasonable, interpretations will be reversed.

The PTAB shows that the notice requirement of Section 132 does have teeth. Read about a particularly egregious rejection from art unit 3747.

Do not let examiners slip a rejection by you based on the idea that the prior art is capable of performing claimed actions of a method.

PPH requests are a great way to move your case to allowance in the US. Learn some tips to make the process even smoother.

Don’t wait until it is too late to secure your trademark rights.

Learn about mutual exclusivity and the variable definitions applied by the USPTO in restriction practice.

Following up on our previous post discussing Vanda, some interesting issues on conditional language are considered.

Oil States - Gorsuch, joined by the Chief Justice, writes a strong dissent that calls the majority’s reasoning into serious questions. Law students will likely be studying this one for years to come.

In Vanda, the Federal Circuit lays out a path for patenting diagnostics inventions post Mayo.