continuation in part
-
Assignment of a Part of a Continuation-in-Part?
Plaintiff AB Coaster Holdings Inc. claimed to be the owner of patents that were subject to terminal disclaimers. Some of the patents were expressly assigned and some were not. Here are the pairings: ‘633 (assigned) and ‘079 (not expressly assigned)‘445 (not expressly assigned) and ‘263 (assigned)‘079 (not expressly assigned) and ‘263 (assigned) The defendant argued… Continue reading
-
Someone Screwed Up
The Patent Prospector summarizes a Federal Circuit review of a botched effort to claim priority to an earlier-filed application. The child was filed without the first page, so there was no express claim of priority to its parent. Result? Patent invalid because it was anticipated by the factual, but not legal, predecessor. Post here. This… Continue reading
About Me
Learn more about me at my website, Chestek Legal
Recent Posts
Categories
- copyright
- domain name
- moral rights
- patent
- right of publicity
- social media
- trade dress
- trade libel
- trade secret
- trademark
- Uncategorized