Advisory Office Action: A Patently-O reader queries why 35 U.S.C. 133 does not extend to after-final advisory actions. Under Section 133, "any action" by the PTO must allow at least thirty-days for a response.
Chief Judge Michel continues to operate behind-the-scenes to block certain elements of patent reform. In a letter to Howard Berman’s staff, Judge Michel argues again that the proposed economic apportionment provisions damage would be difficult to implement. The letter also highlights the recent damages analysis by former AIPLA president BIll Rooklidge while taking a dig at the credibility of law professors who have been pushing for reform — "Lawyers employed by particular companies, like most law professors, have little or no experience [in patent litigation]. Mr. Rooklidge, by contrast, has several decades of litigation experience in precisely these types of cases."MICHEL LETTER , ROOKLIDGE ARTICLE.
Despite a strong brief, the Supreme Court has denied Zoltek’s petition for certiorari that challenges the CAFC’s determination that Governmental patent infringement is not a 5th amendment takings. LINK.
Republicans on Patent Reform: Slow down and get it right. LINK.