Rehearing Will Only Be Granted Where the Board Misapprehended or Overlooked Something

Posted on by

 In Ube Maxell Co., Ltd. v. LG Chem, Ltd., [IPR2013-00471], Paper 29, (February 28, 2014) the Board again denied rehearing of one its decisions to Institute Inter Partes Review.  The Petitioner argued that the failure to intstitute a proceeding as to certiain of the assrted grounds was error, and the Board examined each gounds but was not persuaded that it misapprehended or overlooked any argument Ube Maxell actually advanced in the Petition.  The Board instructed that a request “must specifically identify all matters the party believes the Board misapprehended or overlooked, and the place where each matter was previously addressed in a motion, an opposition, or a reply.” 37 C.F.R. § 42.71(d).

This entry was posted in Inter Partes Review by Bryan Wheelock. Bookmark the permalink.

About Bryan Wheelock

Education J.D., Washington University in St. Louis B.S.E. in Mechanical Engineering, Duke University Bryan Wheelock's practice includes preparation and prosecution of patent and trademark applications and drafting of intellectual property agreements, including non-compete agreements. He has brought and defended lawsuits in federal and state courts relating to intellectual property and has participated in seizures of counterfeit and infringing goods. Bryan prepares and prosecutes U.S. and foreign patent applications for medical devices, mechanical and electromechanical devices, manufacturing machinery and processes, metal alloys and other materials. He also does a substantial amount of patentability searching, trademark availability searching and patent and trademark infringement studies. In addition to his practice at Harness Dickey, Bryan is an Adjunct Professor at Washington University School of Law and Washington University School of Engineering.