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.
Juristat_165
Juristat #8 Overall Rank

E-mail Newsletter

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

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Contact the Docs

Docs on Twitter


Disclaimer

  • "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.

Pharma-50-transparent_216px_red

« USPTO Establishes Interim Procedure for Reconsideration of PTA Determinations Based on Submission of IDS Safe Harbor Statements | Main | Webinar on Lessons From PTAB Full or Partial Denials »

November 13, 2018

Comments

Hey James,

That the claims in these two patents involved patent-eligible subject matter is a "no brainer." And Samsung should be sanctioned for filing a "frivolous motion."

I disagree with the notion that sanctions are in order for filing a frivolous motion.

Like it or not, the "ping-pong" of panel by panel decisions MEANS that ANY shot has the same (arbitrary) likelihood of success, and thus, NO motion can be considered on its face to be frivolous.

THAT the state of the law is such that such Void for Vagueness runs rampant, well, we have the Supreme Court to thank for that.

except that when you lose a 101 the defense immediately files a motion for attorneys fees under 285 because you should have known it was not patentable

Chris,

That motion can be field until the cows come home, but it will not go anywhere as long as the "ping-pong" effect CONTINUES to be seen at the CAFC.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

December 2018

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
30 31