By analyzing and organizing issues and outcomes of the daily ex parte PTAB decisions, Anticipat provides specific appeal data and general appeal trends to help the user become an informed and empowered patent prosecutor.
Stay up to date, and even be an expert, on ex parte developments at the PTAB on any issue. From your inbox, you can easily identify any changes and get a high level view about the decisions, outcomes, and tags of what happened at the PTAB.
Quickly lookup and spot trends and norms of outcomes rates for specific rejections, empowering better decision-making through all stages of patent prosecution. Beta access to Anticipat's research engine provides years of annotated decisions through a combination of human review and machine learning.
Identify effective Office Action response strategies using ranked rationales for actual Appeal reversals, reversal rates for specific grounds of rejections, and legal authority judges rely on in reversing Examiner rejections.
The Anticipat team includes law professors, patent practitioners at law firms, and corporate in house counsel.
Despite recent strides, the USPTO does not make it easy to extract all its data. This is especially true for ex parte appeals decisions from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)--even though these appeals decisions establish key data points about general patent prosecution. We discuss seven shortcomings of the PTO websites as well as Anticipat’s solution to each of these shortcomings. 1) No centralized repository - If you are looking for a decision without ... Read the rest...
In 1753, Swedish botanist Carl Linnaeus introduced a system for classifying plants. His two-term classification system assigned each organism a first generic name and a second, more specific name (e.g., Homo sapiens for humans). This system was different than previous classifications, but not extraordinary. But the elegance and simplicity of his system truly was groundbreaking, paving the way for all living organisms to be systematically and uniformly classified. As the father of modern taxonomy, Linnaeus ... Read the rest...
A patent applicant usually decides to appeal a rejection as a last resort because of the substantial cost and time. When the applicant decides to overlook the substantial cost and time, it is because she believes independent judges will objectively overturn at least one of (but hopefully all) the rejections. These administrative patent judges (APJs) have experience, technical backgrounds, and are independent from Examiners. So if this body of judges were to sustain Examiners' rejections ... Read the rest...