The Patent Shoppe
  • Home
  • Firm Information
    • Areas of Practice
    • Firm Philosophy
    • Services and Pricing
  • Personnel
    • Patrick J. Lavender
  • Insight
  • Links
  • Contact Us

How does Maxwell v. J. Baker, Inc. square with conventional continuation practice?

6/11/2017

 
Conventional continuation practice almost completely eviscerates the public policy underpinnings of Maxwell v. J. Baker, Inc. 86 F.3d 1098 (Fed. Cir. 1996) (see yesterday's post).  Why? The patent applicant could simply file a continuation with a new set of claims which directly read upon his competitor's product, and then immediately sue for infringement of the continuation.

There is one significant limitation to this strategy: to file a continuation (or any type of continuing application for that matter), there must be at least one patent application with the same specification that is still pending at the USPTO which the continuation can validly claim the benefit of via a priority claim.

Comments are closed.

    Insight
    ( Official Blog )

    RSS Feed

© COPYRIGHT 2015, THE PATENT SHOPPE. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. THIS WEBSITE IS PUBLISHED BY THE LAW FIRM THE PATENT SHOPPE. ITS CONTENTS ARE NOT INTENDED TO SERVE AS LEGAL ADVICE OR LEGAL OPINION. SUCH ADVICE MAY ONLY BE PROVIDED WHEN RELATED TO SPECIFIC FACT SITUATIONS THAT THE PATENT SHOPPE HAS BEEN RETAINED AS COUNSEL TO ADDRESS.