ass=”alignleft size-full wp-image-4165″ title=”220px-Wingman” src=”https://www.patentspostgrant.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/220px-Wingman.jpg” alt=”220px-Wingman” width=”220″ height=”177″ />Whether in a social or tactical environment, everyone knows the importance of a good wingman. Yet, the Board of Appeals and Patent Interferences (“BPAI”) has suffered from the absence of its wingman in several recent appeals to the Federal Circuit.
In Rolls-Royce PLC v. United Technologies Corp. (here), the Federal Circuit applied a non-traditional test in its interference-in-fact analysis, and in Agilent Technologies Inc. v. Affymetrix Inc. (see past blog post here), the court imposed a very controversial claim interpretation standard for copied claims. In a rare form of collateral damage, the Agilent decision led the BPAI to rescind one of its fundamental rules, 37 C.F.R. 41.200(b).
Would Solicitor participation in these cases have protected the institutional interests of the BPAI? The answer is not clear. However, absent Solicitor participation, the BPAI’s record will be left to speak for itself. Continue Reading No Interference from USPTO Solicitors at the CAFC?