Groklaw - Digging for Truth

	When you want to know more...

Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines

ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

You won't find me on Facebook

Donate

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.

What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments

Sponsors

Hosting:

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster

Is the PTO bound by the claim construction used by the court? | 319 comments | Create New Account

Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.

Is the PTO bound by the claim construction used by the court?

Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 18 2012 @ 07:53 PM EDT

The answer to your question is "not necessarily". The PTO may or may
not adopt the claim construction from the trial. The reason is that the trial
claim construction is not final and can be appealed. (For that matter, even a
claim construction by appeal court - Federal Circuit Court of Appeals - is not
binding to the PTO.)

I have heard that in re-examinations the PTO adopts really crazy-broad claim
constructions in attempts to knock out the patent. However, final rejections in
re-examinations can be appealed within the PTO itself, and thereafter in the
court system all the way to the brainiacs at Supreme Court. So the fact that
PTO may have rejected the '104 patent means nothing to Google since Oracle can
appeal such rejection for years to come.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

'104 is a reissue patent, broadening original claims - Authored by: hardmath on Sunday, May 20 2012 @ 11:59 AM EDT

Is the PTO bound by the claim construction used by the court?

Authored by: PJ on Friday, May 18 2012 @ 07:53 PM EDT

Leaving out all the footnotes, yes,
the jury trumps the USPTO.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Is the PTO bound by the claim construction used by the court? - Authored by: PJ on Friday, May 18 2012 @ 07:54 PM EDT
- Is the PTO bound by the claim construction used by the court? - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, May 18 2012 @ 08:22 PM EDT
So what happens - Authored by: Wol on Saturday, May 19 2012 @ 03:40 PM EDT

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )