Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Patent Law Blogs -> Golf Patents
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Patent Law
: Golf PatentsProV1 Litigation Update ? Acushnet Updates the Court Regarding the USPTO?s Views of the Callaway Patents
By David Dawsey PE Esq
You may recall that all four of the patents-in-suit are currently being re-examined by the USPTO, and things were not going well for the validity of the patents.
Now, for the update? Yesterday, Acushnet?s attorneys filed a letter to the Court informing the Court that the US Patent & Trademark Office (USPTO) has issued rulings closing the prosecution off ALL the reexaminations, with ALL claims having been rejected as INVALID in ALL four reexaminations. I have reproduced some of the highlights from the letter below, however you may review the complete letter HERE.
We previously advised you that the PTO closed prosecution on the '130 and '873 patents, finding all claims in both patents invalid. See D.I. 469. Callaway has appealed the final determination in the '130 patent to the PTO Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences. We expect it to appeal the rejection of the '873 patent as well once the right of appeal notice (the final procedural step in examination) issues in the near future.
On the enclosed CD, you will find recent lengthy decisions of the PTO rejecting all claims and closing prosecution on the '293 and '156 patents (Exs. 1 and 2, respectively). The PTO has continued to find the claims invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 102 as anticipated by Nesbitt incorporating Molitor '637. The PTO has also found all the claims invalid as obvious under § 103, making scores of rejections over the same prior art in the litigation, including Nesbitt, Proudfit, Wu, Molitor '637, and Molitor '751. The PTO has thus repeatedly found all the claims in these patents to be invalid on many grounds.
.
.
.
.In sum, the PTO has determined that Callaway's claims-in-suit are invalid and should never have issued. The PTO has closed prosecution on all reexaminations, and rejected claims both under the "broadest reasonable construction" applied in reexamination and under the "on the ball" construction applied by this Court. We anticipate that the PTO will issue shortly to Callaway "Right to Appeal Notices," which will formally conclude all proceedings before the examiners in all four of these patents.
David Dawsey ? The IP Golf Guy
Full post as published by Golf Patents on October 10, 2008 (boomark / email).
Mesothelioma Law Suit
Asbestos Exposure
Selection of State Supreme Court Judges
How State Court Judges are Selected
Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Career Choices
Descriptions of law enforcement occupations
California Supreme Court Proposition 8 Decision
Court Rejects Challenges to Proposition 8, but Finds Marriages Valid
Is Barack Obama a Natural Born Citizen?
Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz (Supreme Court): Does Obama meet the constitutional requirements to be President
Heart of Atlanta v United States
Supreme Court Decision: Civil Rights Act Protected by Interstate Commerce Clause
FDA Issues Update on Safety Review Orlistat
Orlistat FDA Issues Update on Safety Review
$189 Million Settlement Reached in Slab Litigation
$189 Million Settlement Reached in Slab Litigation
Breakthrough Settlement Reached In Chinese Drywall Litigation
Chinese Drywall Litigation Breakthrough Settlement Reached
UPDATE 1: Caraco Digoxin Recall
Intuit
allegedly sent out a defective QuickBooks Pro update.
Mexican Vanilla Containing Coumarin
, FDA Issues Consumer Update

California Business Litigation Update Now Available
"Storyline" patent application (Zombie Stare) fares poorly at USPTO
The USPTO Guide for the Preparation of Patent Drawings







