Read about a case where the USPTO finds fault with an expert declaration because it allegedly has the wrong verb tense.

Be careful with loose language in your arguments that might enable the PTAB to affirm in a way that side steps important issues.

More on 101 “experts” at the USPTO

The USPTO is denying they have Section 101 experts at the same time as these experts are conducting interviews and providing guidance to examiners. Why?

An early appeal before the examiner has had a chance to “better” the rejection can sometimes end the case without ever having to deal with those “better” rejections.

Do the quality experts get involved with Appeals? Do they weed out bad rejections or rubber stamp the examiners?

To emphasize or not in your patent prosecution arguments. While we do not answer this question, this post illustrates how the applicant should be careful - it can be dangerous to emphasize language that in a way that the other side can use the emphasis to their advantage.

Know the rules for what it takes to retain flexibility in the claim scope.

Read about motivation to combine and an exception that can swallow the rule.

Can the examiner or examiner appeal panel object to the format of the appeal brief? Read on to find out and see what happens when they try.

What happens when an examiner fails to follow the rules in an Examiner’s Answer? Read on to find out.

It can show up even when you are not expecting it. Anytime an applicant is relying on a visual indicator’s function to differentiate the state of the art, be careful to consider the Printed Matter Doctrine.

Time for a test

Instead, it can be effective to address them head on and show how the rejection errs, even assuming the wacky interpretation is correct.

Routine optimization rejections require that the examiner establish the general working conditions of the claimed invention are disclosed by the cited art.

In a design patent claiming a product, does prior art showing the same design, but for just a component of a product, anticipate? Read about Kim Kardashian West’s skim’s design at the PTAB and find out.

Written description issues around algorithms are complex. Read this latest post for some key drafting and prosecution tips.

See why it is so important to think through your attacks on the prior art and ensure they are consistent with your own specification and figures.

Be careful not to fall into the trap of arguing that the examiner has not followed the most obvious solution in the prior art - such an argument says nothing about less obvious, but still obvious, approaches.

Can an examiner cite a reference “solely” for a specific teaching and ignore the other parts of that reference that undercut the rejection?