About the Authors

  • The Authors and Contributors of "Patent Docs" are patent attorneys and agents, many of whom hold doctorates in a diverse array of disciplines.
2018 Juristant Badge - MBHB_165
Juristat #4 Overall Rank

E-mail Newsletter

  • Enter your e-mail address below to receive the "Patent Docs" e-mail newsletter.

Contact the Docs


  • "Patent Docs" does not contain any legal advice whatsoever. This weblog is for informational purposes only, and its publication does not create an attorney-client relationship. In addition, nothing on "Patent Docs" constitutes a solicitation for business. This weblog is intended primarily for other attorneys. Moreover, "Patent Docs" is the personal weblog of the Authors; it is not edited by the Authors' employers or clients and, as such, no part of this weblog may be so attributed. All posts on "Patent Docs" should be double-checked for their accuracy and current applicability.
Juristat #8 Overall Rank


« Biotech Venture Funding Up 64% in Third Quarter | Main | Groups Petition for NIH Exercise of March-in Rights over Abbott Laboratories' Norvir® »

October 30, 2012


There is an apparent clash between the procedure to unseat someone who is not a "true inventor" and the rationale behind Prior User Rights.

One of the reasons given for expanding Prior User Rights is that a party may not want to expend the effort, time, and money to patent all of their inventions.

Yet, the ONLY way to unseat some follow-on person (who is not a "true inventor") is to seek out a patent and prompt an interference, er, um, a derivation proceeding. Arguably an even more expensive, time-consuming and uncertain venture.

The comments to this entry are closed.

February 2024

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29