Featured Posts
- Facebook Loses Reexaminations of Pragmatus’ Patents
- How is Reexamination Treating Round Rock Research?
- Reexamination has not Saved Apple against MobileMedia Patents, So Far
- What is an “Involved Application” in IPR Practice?
- Apple Victorious over Affinity Labs of Texas’ Portable Audio Player Patent
- Think IP Strategy Offers 2011 News Almanac
- An Update on Oracle’s Infringement Case against Google
- PTO Requests Public Comment on Proposed Rules for AIA Post-Issuance Proceedings
- Microsoft-i4i, Oracle-Google & VirnetX-Apple-Cisco Updates
- Oracle Patent to Emerge from Reexamination
- VirnetX again Sues for Infringement, and again Faces Reexaminations
- How Strong are Google’s Requests for Reexamination of the Lodsys Patents?
- PTO Board Sides with NVIDIA on Two Rambus “Barth I” Patents
- Oracle ‘520 Moves toward Confirmation in Reexamination
- Google Gets Mixed Result against Oracle’s Seventh Patent
- Did Google Request Reexamination of Lodsys Patents?
- Two Updates
- Oracle v. Google Android® Update
- Rambus Wins Limited Exclusion Order at ITC against NVIDIA, despite Pending Reexaminations
- 最初が肝心：不備のない再審査請求書を作成するために
- That’s My Patent You’re Reexamining…
- “Why Wait for Oppositions?” by Scott Daniels, 47 IDEA 343 (Law Review of Franklin Pierce Law School)
- The Basics
Noteworthy Links
- "The Interplay between Reexaminations, Preliminary Injunctions and Stays of Litigation" - by Dennis Crouch at PATENTLYO.COM
Favorite Patent Blogs
- All Things Pros
- CAFC Alert
- FDA Law Blog
- IPWatchdog
- Patent Docs
- Patently-O
- PLI Patent Law Practice Center
- Think IP Strategy
- US Patent Post-Grant Opposition
Recent Requests
PTO Statistics
Superior Essex Files Three Inter Partes Requests
| July 8, 2009
Superior Essex has now filed requests for inter partes reexamination against at least three data cable patents owned by Belden CDT of Canada. Belden had sued Superior Essex in January 2008 for infringement of six patents. Two more patents were added in a Second Amended Compliant filed by Belden this past April.
Superior Essex has now replied with reexamination requests against Belden’s U.S. Patent Nos. 6,570,095, 6,596,944 and 7,339,116.
UPDATE
(August 20, 2009)
The PTO ordered reexamination of the ‘944 patent and simultaneously issued a non-final rejection of all 12 claims on August 19, 2009. Reexamination has been ordered for the ‘116 patent on August 20, 2009, but no Office Action has issued. There is no indication in the PTO docket that any action has been taken by the PTO regarding the ‘095 patent reexamination request.
There is no indication so far whether Superior Essex will seek a stay of the District Court proceeding pending resolution of the reexaminations.
