Appeal 2006-1454
Application 09/004,524
Patent 5,483,421
reissue claim which is barred by recapture is not entitled to a reissue patent under
35 U.S.C. § 251. If there is no reissue patent, there can be no intervening rights.
(13)
Public Notice
We believe that any recapture analysis must be bottomed principally on a
“public notice” analysis which can occur only after a record becomes “fixed.” In
the case of a patent, the “claims” and the “prosecution history” become fixed at the
time the patent is issued--not during “fluid” patent prosecution where claims and
arguments can change depending on the circumstances, e.g., prior art applied and
amendments to claims. It is from a fixed perspective that the public (not the
patentee) must make an analysis of what the patentee surrendered during
prosecution. Moreover, an applicant (not the public) controls what amendments
and arguments are presented during prosecution. When an amendment or
argument is presented, it is the applicant that should be in the best position to
analyze what subject matter (i.e., territory to use the Supreme Court’s language) is
being surrendered (or explain why the reissue claims are materially narrowed).
- 49 -
Page: Previous 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013