Defendants were not estopped under 35 U.S.C. § 315(c) from arguing invalidity based on a prior art computer even though the computer "was actually raised as potential prior art during the [inter partes] reexamination proceeding" because "in reexamination proceedings, the PTO considers only 'patents or printed publications' " and a physical computer is neither.
Acco Brands, Inc. v. PC Guardian Anti-Theft Products, Inc., 3-04-cv-03526 (CAND December 4, 2008, Order)
No comments:
Post a Comment