Ex parte Dotter, 12 USPQ 382 (Bd. App. 1931), cited in MPEP §2173.05(h), holds that it is improper to employ the term "comprising" instead of "consisting of" with respect to a Markush group. The use of "comprising" to introduce the Markush group is open-ended and indefinite.
Sunday, February 25, 2018
Thursday, February 1, 2018
Continuation Patent Applications: 10 Reasons You Should Consider Filing: IP Law Bulletin
Continuation Patent Applications: 10 Reasons You Should Consider Filing: IP Law Bulletin: "Go On the Offensive. Continuation applications can also be used offensively. For example, one can file a continuation with claims covering a competitor’s product as long as it is described in the original parent application."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)