<<Can anyone offer anything intelligent on the '420 USPTO re-exam decision timetable?>>
The most intelligent offering you can receive is one that tells you to ignore the re-examination process. The '420 will expire on April 4, 2016, much sooner than any re-exam process will reach its final, un-appealable, set in stone final action.
Patent re-examination requests imitated by defendants are common during patent infringement litigation.
Here are the basics that many (most) investors need to understand with patent re-exams:
1) They take forever. Not literally, of course. But the USPTO re-exam process most often takes several years. Often the actual legal dispute is resolved long before the re-exam process is anywhere close to being completed.
2) News involving the many, many steps and document filings associated with a re-exam process is extremely easy to distort. Often when a patent re-exam is filed the examiner will initially REJECT any and all claims. The patent office automatically issues a rejection letter but it is non-final. This is standard. The patent office is basically starting over from scratch. It's non-final...
...This is where the distortion angle comes into play. A patent may receive a standard, non-final rejection and FUD will be all over the news outlets with headlines that say "Company XYZ's Patent Rejected!" and the stock will move down 5%, 10%, 15%, or more. Ive seen it happen many times. It can be unnerving and painful to witness, but that's how this game is played.
3) Most investors should ignore all non-final patent re-exam updates. Requesting a patent re-exam is like starting the patent application process all over again, so the patent is automatically rejected until the entire examination if completed and the patent is either "re-approved" or rejected. The process is long so there will be many updates along the way as each party involved takes the necessary action (responses, expert opinions, etc.).
4) Courts have historically enjoyed more power than the patent office. There are some outstanding cases relevant to this issue, such as Baxter that have really confused the situation. The CAFC decision re: Baxter overturns some previous federal decisions. Bottom line is that it's a mess and until it is all sorted out, it's mainly just noise for most investors.
5) Even if a patent, or patents, is/are found invalid (years after the re-exam process begins), the inventor can still appeal. Until that appeal is final, which could be years later, the Court is unlikely to use the invalidity decision against the inventor in any ongoing dispute. Again, Baxter may change things but we don't know that and will have to wait and see.
6) any investor "worried" about a patent re-exam being started, updated, or reported on needs to re-read the above... it's noise... most should ignore it
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
