Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today’s report highlights:
- a blog post arguing the Federal Circuit recently “established a more rigorous test for determining when a published patent application claiming priority to a provisional application can be considered prior art as of its provisional filing date”;
- an article describing how the Federal Circuit recently “upheld a Trademark Trial & Appeal Board decision to partially cancel trademarks”; and
- a blog post discussing the ongoing dispute between Judge Newman and the Federal Circuit.
Dennis Crouch issued a blog post for PatentlyO arguing the Federal Circuit recently “established a more rigorous test for determining when a published patent application claiming priority to a provisional application can be considered prior art as of its provisional filing date.” Crouch suggested the “key holding is that . . . the party asserting the patent application’s prior art status must show not only that at least one claim in the published application is supported by the provisional application, but also that the specific content in the published application relied on for the rejection has written description support in the provisional application.” For more information, check out the relevant opinion in In re Riggs.
Hannah Hurley authored an article for the National Law Review describing how the Federal Circuit recently “upheld a Trademark Trial & Appeal Board decision to partially cancel trademarks.” According to Hurley, the court ruled “that an opposition challenger could not use the zone of natural expansion doctrine to claim priority because the doctrine is strictly defensive.” For more information, check out the relevant opinion in Dollar Financial Group, Inc. v. Brittex Financial, Inc.
Kevin E. Noonan penned a blog post for Patent Docs discussing the ongoing dispute between Judge Newman and the Federal Circuit. Noonan asserted that differences in the positions of medical experts examining Newman’s psychological fitness are “technical enough to be impossible for someone without a medical degree to effectively evaluate.” Yet, he noted, they “are filled with deprecations and quasi-personal attacks.”