topics petition-for-rehearing 
Patently-O
SEPTEMBER 26, 2022
A quick recap: Despite dozens of interesting and important cases, the Supreme Court denied all petitions for writ of certiorari for the 2021-2022 term. The most anticipated case last year was the 101 eligibility petition regarding automobile drive shaft manufacturing process.
Patently-O
APRIL 14, 2023
by David Hricik, Mercer Law School As has been reported by Dennis on the main page, by Gene Quinn on IP Watchdog ( here ), and by various media I am seeing, Chief Judge Moore reportedly threatened Judge Newman with a petition to remove Judge Newman as incompetent to carry out her duties unless Judge Newman agreed to take senior status.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Patently-O
NOVEMBER 6, 2022
On Friday, the Supreme Court granted certiorari on two petitions raising intellectual property issues, including the closely-watched enablement case Amgen v. Amgen petitioned the Supreme Court for review, extensively citing the Karshtedt/Seymore/Lemley article. . By Jason Rantanen. The other case is a Abitron Austria GmbH v.
Patently-O
OCTOBER 5, 2021
The following comes from the Notice: Since 2017, the Federal Circuit has issued numerous decisions applying the Supreme Court’s legal framework in a variety of contexts, and many petitions for writ of certiorari have been filed. In particular, the Government highlighted the then-pending certiorari petition in Athena Diagnostics, Inc.
LexBlog IP
AUGUST 15, 2023
The Delegated Rehearing Panel (DRP) will review Board institution and final written decisions in AIA trials. The memo includes a discussion of the following topics, among others: Instances where the Board will not decide all appealed issues. After the Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Arthrex, Inc. ,
Fish & Richardson Trademark & Copyright Thoughts
FEBRUARY 7, 2022
The Director’s de novo review yields no deference to the panel’s decision, a stark contrast to the rehearing procedure, which is limited to issues “the Board misapprehended or overlooked,” 37 C.F.R. Unlike rehearing, Director review is not available for non-final decisions or institution decisions. Download a PDF. Table of Contents.
Fish & Richardson Trademark & Copyright Thoughts
APRIL 1, 2022
The director’s de novo review yields no deference to the board’s decision, a notable distinction from the rehearing procedure, which is limited to issues “the Board misapprehended or overlooked.”[5]. Likewise, as with rehearing, the interim procedures do not reserve briefing for the nonrequesting party.
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
125 
Let's personalize your content