Anticipate This!™ | Patent and Trademark Law Blog

Senator Harry Reid on Patent Reform – A Priority For The First Session of 2008.

Posted in General Commentary, Statute Commentary by Jake Ward on January 23, 2008

Via the Tahoe Daily Tribune, majority leader Sen. Harry Reid outlined Democrats’ legislative priorities for the first session of 2008 during a statement on the U.S. Senate floor today.  Regarding patent law reform:

Once we work these issues out, time permitting, we will also turn to two other priorities in this first work period: patent reform and an energy package. On patent reform, we must carefully strike the right balance with a bill that promotes rather than blocks innovation from enterprising entrepreneurs. The energy package consists of dozens of land and water bills that have already passed the House and the Senate Energy committee by overwhelming bipartisan margins. Among these worthy and non-controversial measures are Senator Murray’s ‘wild sky wilderness’ bill, which she has championed now for more than five years.

If not for the obstruction of just a few Senators, we would have passed these bills last year. I am hopeful that the overwhelming majority of Senators – Democrats and Republicans alike – will have their voices heard this year.

Hat tips to Zura and Patently-O.

See also a previous AT! post on the Draft Committee Report for the Patent Reform Act of 2007 here.

Revised Procedure for an Oath or Declaration.

Posted in Practice Commentary by Jake Ward on January 23, 2008

Per a USPTO press release today: 

If an oath or declaration filed on or after June 1, 2008 does not include the express language set forth in 37 CFR 1.63(b)(3), the Office will object to the oath or declaration as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.63.  A supplemental oath or declaration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.67 will then be required.

The pertinent section of CFR 1.63 Oath or Declaration states:

(b) In addition to meeting the requirements of paragraph (a) of this section, the oath or declaration must also: . . .

(3) State that the person making the oath or declaration acknowledges the duty to disclose to the Office all information known to the person to be material to patentability as defined in § 1.56.  (Emphasis mine).

Practitioners are hereby put on notice to check and, if necessary, update their oath or declaration forms. 

JW Note:  Rule of thumb in checking your forms: “material to examination” = bad; and “material to patentability” = good.