[ad_1]
“The CAFC mentioned these parts of the grievance ‘merely critique the PTO for rejecting her claims and the PTAB for sustaining most of these rejections, and at no level does Bhagat establish particular false statements or actions of misconduct from the PTO or cite to any portion of the Structure to help the PTO’s alleged violation of her constitutional rights.’”
The U.S. Courtroom of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) on Wednesday affirmed plenty of district courtroom orders in opposition to inventor Urvashi Bhagat, whose patent software was rejected by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Workplace (USPTO).
Bhagat’s U.S. patent software No. 13/877,847 covers orally-delivered dietary formulations containing omega-6 fatty acids and antioxidants. The appliance was filed in 2013 and the USPTO examiner rejected all claims as apparent, two claims as missing written description, a number of different claims as indefinite and others for improper dependency. On attraction to the PTAB, the Board summarily affirmed the dependency and indefiniteness rejections, affirmed the obviousness rejection on the deserves and reversed the written description rejection. Bhagat then appealed to the U.S. District Courtroom for the Japanese District of Virginia, claiming the USPTO erroneously rejected her patent claims and asking for damages because of the Workplace’s unhealthy religion and for taking her property. The district courtroom granted the USPTO’s movement to dismiss all claims besides the patent claims in July 2021, however struck her request for a jury trial.
In the course of the district courtroom proceedings, the USPTO argued that all the pending claims had been ineligible for patenting below Part 101 and sure claims had been additionally apparent. The district courtroom finally agreed and located that “the Utility claims recited a mix of vitamins naturally current in almonds, with a few of the claims describing the identical dosages of omega-6 fatty acids, polyphenols, and phytosterols contained in almonds” at Alice the first step and, at Alice step two, that “all of the remaining limitations recited well-known actions akin to standard packaging practices, crushing almonds right into a powder, and ‘administering,’ ‘figuring out,’ ‘choosing,’ and ‘making ready’ steps.”
Bhagat appealed to the CAFC, difficult plenty of the the district courtroom’s orders. The courtroom had requested that she file paper motions to request reduction from the courtroom, denied her request for the enlargement of discovery, denied ing her problem to the admissibility of professional testimony, and denied her depart to file a second amended grievance. Bhagat additionally alleged due course of violations as a result of the judges wouldn’t recuse themselves. She additional challenged the district courtroom’s dismissal of her damages, takings, and misconduct claims and its refusal to grant her a jury trial, in addition to the denial of her movement to strike and the grant of the USPTO’s movement for abstract judgment.
In its dialogue, the CAFC mentioned Bhagat had did not reveal that the district courtroom abused its discretion or violated due course of, noting that her request to increase discovery was filed after the shut of discovery; that the courtroom’s guidelines requiring written motions quite than digital filings didn’t violate due course of and aren’t in battle with the Federal Guidelines of Civil Process; that Bhagat’s challenges to the professional’s testimony went to weight, quite than admissibility, and due to this fact the courtroom’s denial of her movement to exclude it was correct; that her movement for depart to file a second amended grievance was delayed and thus correctly denied; and that her arguments for the judges to recuse themselves, which she raised for the primary time on attraction, had been inadequate to ascertain that the judges had been biased.
As to dismissal, the CAFC mentioned the district courtroom accurately dismissed Bhagat’s Takings Declare for lack of jurisdiction and located that her arguments that the district courtroom erred in dismissing her claims for misconduct, constitutional violations and mandamus reduction merely amounted to makes an attempt to level to her Amended Grievance to point out that “she had a constitutional proper to have her Utility concern as a legitimate patent and that the PTO’s refusal to take action was a results of its unhealthy religion and misconduct.” The CAFC mentioned these parts of the grievance “merely critique the PTO for rejecting her claims and the PTAB for sustaining most of these rejections, and at no level does Bhagat establish particular false statements or actions of misconduct from the PTO or cite to any portion of the Structure to help the PTO’s alleged violation of her constitutional rights.”
So far as the grant of abstract judgment, the Federal Circuit discovered that there have been no disputed points of fabric undeniable fact that contradicted the ineligibility or obviousness findings as a result of Bhagat’s arguments in opposition to these findings amounted to “conclusory statements”. The CAFC briefly affirmed the district courtroom’s eligibility evaluation and located that the district courtroom didn’t err in granting abstract judgment on both ineligibility or obviousness.
Bhagat mentioned in an e-mail despatched to IPWatchdog that she plans to attraction the choice to the U.S. Supreme Courtroom.
Picture Supply: Deposit Photographs
Picture ID:103763568
Copyright:bigfatnapoleon
[ad_2]
Source link
