Appeal No. 1999-0610 Page 9
Application No. 08/601,186
section 154(b) provides for possible extensions of the term of
a patent if the issue of the patent is delayed due to (1) an
interference proceeding or secrecy order or (2) appellate
review, where the patent is issued pursuant to a decision in
the review reversing an adverse decision on patentability.
Thus, section 154 does not, as appellants suggest, ensure that
a patent issued on the
instant application will expire 20 years from the earliest
filing date claimed under section 120 and, hence, does not
ensure that the issuance of a patent on the instant
application could not result in a timewise extension of the
"right to exclude" granted by U.S. Patent No. 5,531,715.
Moreover, a second recognized objection to double
patenting is the potential for harassment of an accused
infringer by multiple parties with patents covering subject
matter which is not patentably distinct. See, eg., In re Van
Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 944-48, 214 USPQ 761, 767-70 (CCPA 1982).
Thus, even assuming, arguendo, that a patent issuing on the
instant application would necessarily expire on or before the
expiry of the term of U.S. Patent No. 5,531,715 under the
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007