InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 49
Posts 2387
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 08/07/2007

Re: streetstylz post# 152946

Tuesday, 02/17/2009 3:21:23 PM

Tuesday, February 17, 2009 3:21:23 PM

Post# of 326352
The patent has been upheld by the USPTO otherwise we would have seen another non-final rejection or final rejection.

Great news!! looks like we will have to wait to see what modifications may have been made to the claims.

It is intended that the examiner's first ex parte action on the merits be the primary action to establish the issues which exist between the examiner and the patent owner insofar as the patent is concerned. At the time the first action is issued, the patent owner has already been permitted to file a statement and an amendment pursuant to 37 CFR 1.530; and the reexamination requester, if the requester is not the patent owner, has been permitted to reply thereto pursuant to 37 CFR 1.535. Thus, at this point, the issues should be sufficiently focused to enable the examiner to make a definitive first ex parte action on the merits which should clearly establish the issues which exist between the examiner and the patent owner insofar as the patent is concerned. In view of the fact that the examiner's first action will clearly establish the issues, the first action should include a statement cautioning the patent owner that a complete response should be made to the action since the next action is expected to be a final action. The first action should further caution the patent owner that the requirements of 37 CFR 1.116(b) will be strictly enforced after final action and that any amendment after a final action must include "a showing of good and sufficient reasons why the amendment is necessary and was not earlier presented" in order to be considered. The language of form paragraph 22.04 is appropriate for inclusion in the first Office action:

http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/documents/2200_2260.htm#sect2260


"A man doesn't know what he knows until he knows what he doesn't know"