Speaking Engagements

The Promise of Reexamination:  Fulfilled or Fizzled?

2011 Annual Meeting of the American Intellectual Property Law Association

The ex parte reexamination statute was enacted prior to the creation of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, during a time when the outcome of enforcement actions were unpredictable, at best, and often negative for patent owners. One goal of ex parte reexamination was to strengthen patents to withstand scrutiny by courts hostile to them by providing an alternative avenue for testing those of “doubtful” validity, with the ultimate goal of boosting the confidence of investors in patents, thus encouraging them to create and grow businesses.

Ironically, increasing interest over the last few years, particularly in inter partes reexamination, appears motivated by a perceived difficultly of challenging the validity of patents in district court. Yet, even with this uptick in interest, the number of reexaminations remains far below the levels the Patent and Trademark Office originally predicted, and relatively low when compared to the number of patents granted and the number of patent infringement disputes. Despite original intentions, reexamination has not supplanted litigation as the primary mechanism for challenging the validity of patents.

Furthermore, rather than proving to be a cost-effective alternative that boosts confidence in the validity of patents, reexamination is often conducted in parallel with district court litigation for purposes of gaining tactical advantage, driving up the cost and delaying enforcement of patents.  Reexamination thus appears to have done little to advance the goals of reduced costs and increased confidence in the strength of patents and the process of obtaining and enforcing them.

Read more.

The publications contained in this site do not constitute legal advice. Legal advice can only be given with knowledge of the client's specific facts. By putting these publications on our website we do not intend to create a lawyer-client relationship with the user. Materials may not reflect the most current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. This information should in no way be taken as an indication of future results.

Search Tips:

You may use the wildcard symbol (*) as a root expander.  A search for "anti*" will find not only "anti", but also "anti-trust", "antique", etc.

Entering two terms together in a search field will behave as though an "OR" is being used.  For example, entering "Antique Motorcars" as a Client Name search will find results with either word in the Client Name.


AND and OR may be used in a search.  Note: they must be capitalized, e.g., "Project AND Finance." 

The + and - sign operators may be used.  The + sign indicates that the term immediately following is required, while the - sign indicates to omit results that contain that term. E.g., "+real -estate" says results must have "real" but not "estate".

To perform an exact phrase search, surround your search phrase with quotation marks.  For example, "Project Finance".

Searches are not case sensitive.

back to top