Call 855-808-4530 or email GroupSales@alm.com to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Beginning on Nov. 13, 2018, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) will cease to apply the broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) standard for newly-filed IPR, PGR, and CBM trials under the America Invents Act (AIA). Instead, the USPTO will begin “using the same claim construction standard that would be used to construe the claim in a civil action[,] … including construing the claim in accordance with the ordinary and customary meaning of such claim … and the prosecution history pertaining to the patent.” 37 C.F.R. §42.100. The new rules also state that the USPTO will consider “[a]ny prior claim construction determination concerning a term of the claim in a civil action, or a proceeding before the International Trade Commission, that is timely made of record.” 37 C.F.R. §42.100.
By Daniel R. Saeedi
The Detail Dilemma
How much detail does it take to allege a trade secret under federal pleadings standards? Can the alleged trade secret be described generally in the complaint or must it be described in detail? This article analyzes the various considerations that inform a court’s viewpoint on the issue. Lawyers who litigate trade secret cases should be well-aware of these considerations.
By Lawrence E. Ashery
The stage is set for the 24-year-old north American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) to end and the U.S. Mexico Canada Agreement (USMCA), which has implications for intellectual property, to take its place.
By Jeff Ginsberg and George Soussou
Obviousness Determination Can Be Different for Apparatus and Method Claims
Petitioner “Bears the Burden” On Demonstrating Real Parties in Interest
By Scott D. Locke
The recent In Re Rembrandt Technologies decision is a reminder of both the potential consequence of a patent holder’s disingenuous assertion of unintentionality and the challenges that defendants face when raising the improper filing of a petition to revive a lapsed patent as a defense.