• Subscribe

    Subscribe to the RSS feed Subscribe to the blogs's ATOM feed
    Add to your Google Home Page or Google Reader Add to your My Yahoo!
    Add to your My MSN Add to your My AOL
    Subscribe to the Comments RSS feed Add to your Bloglines
    Email Subscription



  • The opinions, commentary and characterizations provided to this online forum by the authors and moderators are provided for encouraging discussion, thought and debate on important post grant issues. These postings are in no way representative of the opinions of Oblon Spivak et al., or its clients.

The Not So Special Pendency of Narrowing Patent Reissue Applications

Posted On: Oct. 27, 2010   By: Scott A. McKeown
Topics: Reissue
Narrowing Reissue Applications Seem to Fare No Better than Regular Applications

nreissue

Last week I explained the disappointing state of broadening reissue application pendency over the first 5 years. As shown in the charts above (click to enlarge images), I analyzed the 129 narrowing patent reissues filed since 2005. Not surprisingly,  narrowing reissues applications fare much better in terms of pendency (close to 80% being concluded within 5 years).

Apparently, without recapture muddying the waters, and with the more familiar narrowing of claims, the Examining Corps seems to have less difficulty moving these applications along. …albeit at around the same pace as a routine patent application. With most narrowing reissue applications involving highly valued patents, a shorter pendency or “special dispatch” seems to be in order.

As to the low number of narrowing reissues (129) relative to broadening (745), it seems plaintiffs are more willing to try their luck with the heightened invalidity standards of district courts for most “errors made without deceptive intent” rather than revisit the USPTO for several more years.

Comments are closed.