§

Jenam Tech LLC

PGR2021-00082 (P.T.A.B. Nov. 17, 2021)
Jenam Tech LLC

6 Cited authorities

  1. Vectra Fitness, Inc. v. TNWK Corp.

    162 F.3d 1379 (Fed. Cir. 1998)   Cited 46 times   5 Legal Analyses
    In Vectra Fitness, although the PTO added a terminal disclaimer to the prosecution history, it failed to enter the terminal disclaimer on the cover page or contents page of the prosecution history, and failed to publish the terminal disclaimer in the Offi- cial Gazette as contemplated by PTO regulations.

  2. Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc.

    880 F.3d 1345 (Fed. Cir. 2018)   Cited 10 times   8 Legal Analyses

    2017-1239 01-24-2018 ARTHREX, INC., Appellant v. SMITH & NEPHEW, INC., ArthroCare Corp., Appellees Anthony P. Cho, Carlson, Gaskey & Olds, P.C., Birmingham, MI, argued for appellant. Also represented by David J. Gaskey, Birmingham, MI. Nathan R. Speed, Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, PC, Boston, MA, argued for appellees. Also represented by Richard Giunta, Boston, MA, Michael N. Rader, New York, NY. Dyk, Circuit Judge. Anthony P. Cho, Carlson, Gaskey & Olds, P.C., Birmingham, MI, argued for appellant.

  3. Section 253 - Disclaimer

    35 U.S.C. § 253   Cited 180 times   38 Legal Analyses
    Granting patentee authority to disclaim issued or pending claims

  4. Section 324 - Institution of post-grant review

    35 U.S.C. § 324   Cited 42 times   58 Legal Analyses
    Requiring threshold determination that it is "more likely than not that at least 1 of the claims . . . is unpatentable"

  5. Section 1.321 - Statutory disclaimers, including terminal disclaimers

    37 C.F.R. § 1.321   Cited 75 times   35 Legal Analyses
    Incorporating the language of § 253

  6. Section 42.207 - Preliminary response to petition

    37 C.F.R. § 42.207   Cited 5 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Permitting patent owner to file preliminary responses to petition for post-grant review