Issues of Exceeding the Proper Scope Continue to Plague the Board

In Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc. v. The Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University,  IPR2013-00308, Paper 27 (June 6, 2014) another patent owner was complaining that the Petitioner  had exceeded the proper scope in its reply.  The Board “noted that we understood Patent Owner’s frustration and concern” but reiterated that it will sort out the proper from the improper when making the final written decision.”  In response to the argument that the Board cannot “unread” the improper material, the Board reminde the patent owner that the Board is comprised of “persons of competent legal knowledge and scientific ability,” fully capable of disregarding the portions of the record it is excluding.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized 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.