"The government's narrative cannot be allowed to rest on the testimony of a witness who by her own admission is not competent because she admitted to having no firsthand knowledge."
"SAWS flagged certain patent applications deemed 'sensitive' for elevated management oversight and additional layers of review before allowance, ostensibly as a quality-control mechanism."
"This de facto suppression of applications caught in the SAWS snare occurred without transparency or due process and violated federal law."
"35 U.S.C. § 132 requires the USPTO to provide applicants with notice of rejections and the reasons therefor-something that must be memorialized in the written record."
The USPTO has operated a secret examination docket, violating federal law and lacking transparency. The Morinville v. USPTO case seeks to expose this shadow docket through discovery. The Sensitive Application Warning System (SAWS), active from 1994 to 2015, flagged sensitive patent applications for additional review without informing applicants. This practice suppressed applications without due process, violating 35 U.S.C. § 132, which mandates notice of rejections and reasons, thus undermining the integrity of the patent review process.
Read at IPWatchdog.com | Patents & Intellectual Property Law
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]