Comments on: Is the Public Interest Really Upheld by the New USPTO Rules? http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2007/11/01/is-the-public-interest-really-upheld-by-the-new-uspto-rules/ Freshly Brewed Bio/Pharma Chat. Served Up Daily. Thu, 18 Mar 2010 11:54:35 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Patent Baristas » Patent Rule Injunction, Court To Sleep On It http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2007/11/01/is-the-public-interest-really-upheld-by-the-new-uspto-rules/comment-page-1/#comment-40764 Patent Baristas » Patent Rule Injunction, Court To Sleep On It Fri, 08 Feb 2008 20:15:01 +0000 http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2007/11/01/is-the-public-interest-really-upheld-by-the-new-uspto-rules/#comment-40764 [...] Is the Public Interest Really Upheld by the New USPTO Rules? Posted February 8th, 2008 by Stephen Albainy-Jenei in Patent Reform | | [...] [...] Is the Public Interest Really Upheld by the New USPTO Rules? Posted February 8th, 2008 by Stephen Albainy-Jenei in Patent Reform | | [...]

]]> By: Patent Baristas » Patent Reform: What Does First-To-File Mean To Me? http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2007/11/01/is-the-public-interest-really-upheld-by-the-new-uspto-rules/comment-page-1/#comment-37561 Patent Baristas » Patent Reform: What Does First-To-File Mean To Me? Fri, 18 Jan 2008 03:27:07 +0000 http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2007/11/01/is-the-public-interest-really-upheld-by-the-new-uspto-rules/#comment-37561 [...] Ironically, under the Law of Unintended Consequences, the combination of early filings of raw, unrefined applications along with the increase in the number of applications may have just the opposite effect of what the Patent Office would like.  The Patent Office just may have an even greater backlog than the one that caused it to put forth its much-maligned proposed Continuations, Claims and IDS rules (Final Rules). [...] [...] Ironically, under the Law of Unintended Consequences, the combination of early filings of raw, unrefined applications along with the increase in the number of applications may have just the opposite effect of what the Patent Office would like.  The Patent Office just may have an even greater backlog than the one that caused it to put forth its much-maligned proposed Continuations, Claims and IDS rules (Final Rules). [...]

]]> By: Patent Baristas » Brief Highlights Patent Office’s “Suspicious Procedures” http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2007/11/01/is-the-public-interest-really-upheld-by-the-new-uspto-rules/comment-page-1/#comment-36830 Patent Baristas » Brief Highlights Patent Office’s “Suspicious Procedures” Fri, 11 Jan 2008 21:51:21 +0000 http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2007/11/01/is-the-public-interest-really-upheld-by-the-new-uspto-rules/#comment-36830 [...] Line Up in Impending Patent Continuations Fight Is the Public Interest Really Upheld by the New USPTO Rules? Court Blocks New USPTO Rules on Continuations and Claims — For Now Patent Wars Episode II: GSK [...] [...] Line Up in Impending Patent Continuations Fight Is the Public Interest Really Upheld by the New USPTO Rules? Court Blocks New USPTO Rules on Continuations and Claims — For Now Patent Wars Episode II: GSK [...]

]]> By: anonymous http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2007/11/01/is-the-public-interest-really-upheld-by-the-new-uspto-rules/comment-page-1/#comment-28645 anonymous Tue, 06 Nov 2007 19:54:04 +0000 http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2007/11/01/is-the-public-interest-really-upheld-by-the-new-uspto-rules/#comment-28645 You see, the USPTO defines "public" as "non-customers", so whenever they deny a customer, they uphold the public. Get it? The File Information Unit at the USPTO has a similar pro-public philosophy which has been successfully implemented for years now. The original EFS that no one used was based on a similar corollary (i.e. the public would have been dis-served if the customers had a usable system). Government of the people, by the people, for the people. (You just need to understand which "people" you're excluded from.) You see, the USPTO defines “public” as “non-customers”, so whenever they deny a customer, they uphold the public. Get it? The File Information Unit at the USPTO has a similar pro-public philosophy which has been successfully implemented for years now. The original EFS that no one used was based on a similar corollary (i.e. the public would have been dis-served if the customers had a usable system).

Government of the people, by the people, for the people. (You just need to understand which “people” you’re excluded from.)

]]> By: Tech LawForum » Snickers for GSK, Candy Corn for the PTO http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2007/11/01/is-the-public-interest-really-upheld-by-the-new-uspto-rules/comment-page-1/#comment-28149 Tech LawForum » Snickers for GSK, Candy Corn for the PTO Fri, 02 Nov 2007 16:04:48 +0000 http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2007/11/01/is-the-public-interest-really-upheld-by-the-new-uspto-rules/#comment-28149 [...] Additional discussions by the Patent Baristas, Peter Zura at the 271 Patent Blog, Patently-O, and Patent Prospector. [...] [...] Additional discussions by the Patent Baristas, Peter Zura at the 271 Patent Blog, Patently-O, and Patent Prospector. [...]

]]>