http://mypatentbar.com/2008/08/25/q-federal-court-decisions-binding-for-office-40019p/ Patent Bar Review and Study Guide Tue, 22 May 2012 00:33:43 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 http://mypatentbar.com/2008/08/25/q-federal-court-decisions-binding-for-office-40019p/#comment-37543 TheGhostOfBilski Fri, 06 Apr 2012 00:04:43 +0000 http://patentbar.wordpress.com/?p=703#comment-37543 MnGirl I think you mean the Court held patent *valid* or *not invalid*, but USPTO could still find patent invalid. MnGirl I think you mean the Court held patent *valid* or *not invalid*, but USPTO could still find patent invalid.

]]> http://mypatentbar.com/2008/08/25/q-federal-court-decisions-binding-for-office-40019p/#comment-35559 MnGirl Wed, 21 Mar 2012 03:56:52 +0000 http://patentbar.wordpress.com/?p=703#comment-35559 Got this one verbatim. Easy point. Answer was the choice where it said the court held the patent invalid, but USPTO could still find the patent invalid. Got this one verbatim. Easy point. Answer was the choice where it said the court held the patent invalid, but USPTO could still find the patent invalid.

]]> http://mypatentbar.com/2008/08/25/q-federal-court-decisions-binding-for-office-40019p/#comment-29524 Remanded Sat, 21 Jan 2012 00:54:51 +0000 http://patentbar.wordpress.com/?p=703#comment-29524 Saw this one today. The correct answer was still B, but it was written in the double negative (not invalid). Saw this one today. The correct answer was still B, but it was written in the double negative (not invalid).

]]> http://mypatentbar.com/2008/08/25/q-federal-court-decisions-binding-for-office-40019p/#comment-17917 Jeremy Tue, 18 Oct 2011 20:09:54 +0000 http://patentbar.wordpress.com/?p=703#comment-17917 I had this question today 10-18-11, however the wording of the correct answer was modified to "not invalid." The answer remains the same, though the wording was cause for pause. I had this question today 10-18-11, however the wording of the correct answer was modified to “not invalid.” The answer remains the same, though the wording was cause for pause.

]]> http://mypatentbar.com/2008/08/25/q-federal-court-decisions-binding-for-office-40019p/#comment-17401 Anon Wed, 12 Oct 2011 04:07:55 +0000 http://patentbar.wordpress.com/?p=703#comment-17401 Close variant om 10/11/11 Close variant om 10/11/11

]]> http://mypatentbar.com/2008/08/25/q-federal-court-decisions-binding-for-office-40019p/#comment-16023 Remanded Mon, 19 Sep 2011 00:21:26 +0000 http://patentbar.wordpress.com/?p=703#comment-16023 Got a close variant to this one today, 18 September 2011. Got a close variant to this one today, 18 September 2011.

]]> http://mypatentbar.com/2008/08/25/q-federal-court-decisions-binding-for-office-40019p/#comment-11907 Freds Sat, 04 Jun 2011 08:32:16 +0000 http://patentbar.wordpress.com/?p=703#comment-11907 I think the district/Fed.Cir distinction is a red herring. If you understand collateral estoppel and issue preclusion, this rule is easy despite so many variations. Basically, Court's validity finding of a patent cannot be used to preclude PTO from the patent invalid on other grounds, but court's invalidity finding is final such that the patent is invalid. Think that for a minute, that should make perfect sense. I think the district/Fed.Cir distinction is a red herring. If you understand collateral estoppel and issue preclusion, this rule is easy despite so many variations. Basically, Court’s validity finding of a patent cannot be used to preclude PTO from the patent invalid on other grounds, but court’s invalidity finding is final such that the patent is invalid. Think that for a minute, that should make perfect sense.

]]> http://mypatentbar.com/2008/08/25/q-federal-court-decisions-binding-for-office-40019p/#comment-11875 Big Bad Voodoo Daddy Fri, 03 Jun 2011 16:42:21 +0000 http://patentbar.wordpress.com/?p=703#comment-11875 Regarding this question however - the difference in the district and federal courts is not accounted for in the answer, because in my understanding the validity opinion of the district court will not matter, since it is not binding upon the pto. Regarding this question however – the difference in the district and federal courts is not accounted for in the answer, because in my understanding the validity opinion of the district court will not matter, since it is not binding upon the pto.

]]> http://mypatentbar.com/2008/08/25/q-federal-court-decisions-binding-for-office-40019p/#comment-11529 ohsoobvious Wed, 25 May 2011 19:01:12 +0000 http://patentbar.wordpress.com/?p=703#comment-11529 i had a close variant of this on 5/18/11 i had a close variant of this on 5/18/11

]]> http://mypatentbar.com/2008/08/25/q-federal-court-decisions-binding-for-office-40019p/#comment-10898 Becker Tue, 17 May 2011 19:38:17 +0000 http://patentbar.wordpress.com/?p=703#comment-10898 I got this question 5/16/2011. I got this question 5/16/2011.

]]>