Intellectual Property Forum The Intellectual Property Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

The forum software has been upgraded.  New registrations are not currently permitted while we iron out any bugs and other matters.  Please report any problems you find.

Pages: 1 [2]

Author Topic: Patent invalidated by litigation -- is there any centralized public notice?  (Read 2729 times)

horsechute

  • Lead Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 969
    • View Profile

By "book version", do you mean the old bound books " ?

I meant that the Shepards service at least used to list patents that were litigated, and they would publish them in their bound copies. This is interesting if you are interested in historical patent law, like I am, since you can look up the litigation history of old cases using the patent number.

Interesting that the clerks (at the law firms of the parties?) sometimes do not provide the notice to the PTO that the patent was litigated; I sometimes see a case that was litigated but does not show up in the Lexis patent file. I think it is usually pretty accurate, though.
Logged

TataBox

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 696
    • View Profile

The clerks are supposed to notify the USPTO, but my experience has been that they do not always do so (in fact, I would say as a rule, that they don't).

Thought it was weird that the patent law impose a duty on district court clerks. How are they gonna enforce that.

When I first ran across these lawsuit-has-been-filed papers in PAIR, I assumed that one of the parties (probably the accused infringer) filed the paper.

I am not sure I understand.  The Plaintiff will file the form (AO 120) in the USPTO that the patent is being litigated.  There is no duty on the clerks as far as I know.

Logged

bleedingpen

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 759
    • View Profile

I am not sure I understand.  The Plaintiff will file the form (AO 120) in the USPTO that the patent is being litigated.  There is no duty on the clerks as far as I know.


35 USC 290 reads

The clerks of the courts of the United States, within one month after the filing of an action under this title, shall give notice thereof in writing to the Director, setting forth so far as known the names and addresses of the parties, name of the inventor, and the designating number of the patent upon which the action has been brought. If any other patent is subsequently included in the action he shall give like notice thereof. Within one month after the decision is rendered or a judgment issued the clerk of the court shall give notice thereof to the Director. The Director shall, on receipt of such notices, enter the same in the file of such patent.
« Last Edit: 05-17-11 at 04:50 pm by bleedingpen »
Logged

Yak

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 500
    • View Profile

A little of a side point, but I recently came across a website which lists all the patents that have received reexam requests. 

http://www.invntree.com/blogs/uspto-reexamination-request-update-%E2%80%93-may-09-may-16-2011
Logged
Not legal advice... Batteries are not included... Any resemblance to real persons, living or dead is purely coincidental... Eating raw or undercooked meat, poultry, eggs or seafood poses a health risk.
Pages: 1 [2]
 



Footer

www.intelproplaw.com

Terms of Use
Feel free to contact us:
Sorry, spam is killing us.

iKnight Technologies Inc.

www.intelproplaw.com

Page created in 0.087 seconds with 16 queries.