Reanimating U.S. Patent Reexamination: Recommendations for Change based upon a Comparative Study of German Law
No Thumbnail Available
Authors
Bauz, N. Thane
Issue Date
1994
Type
Journal Article
Language
Keywords
Alternative Title
Abstract
FIRST PARAGRAPH(S)|Acknowledging the problem of high patent invalidity rates resulting from inadequate pregrant patent application examination, Judge Giles S. Rich wrote: No human institution is perfect; certainly the Patent Office examinations for patentability are not, and consequently patents are not. In view of the inherent limitations of Patent Office examination, it seems obvious that something must be added to it to make patents less vulnerable to attack than they now are. This Article, explicitly recognizing the potential of patent reexamination, attempts to define Judge Rich's "something" in terms of a reformed patent reexamination system. Excessive costs associated with litigating issues of patent validity, the difficulty associated with educating judges and juries in matters of patent prosecution and complex technology, the economic hardship imposed by patent invalidity, and the lack of meaningful industry participation during the patent reexamination process can be addressed through implementation of any of several unique statutory schemes for patent reexamination...
Description
Citation
27 Creighton L. Rev. 945 (1993-1994)
Publisher
Creighton University School of Law