Patently-O Bits and Bytes: New Job Openings

• Patent Prosecutor - Law Firm - Woodbridge, N.J.
• Patent Counsel - Small Corporation - Cambridge, Mass.
• Patent Attorney (Prosecution) - Law Firm - Alexandria, Va.
• Sr. Intellectual Property Counsel - Law Firm - Boston, Mass.
• Patent Agent/Associate - Law Firm - Rockville, Md.
• Patently-O Jobs Sponsored by Franklin Pierce Law Center.

Centocor v. Abbott: In June 2009, Centocor won a $1.67 billion judgment against Abbott based on the jury's findings that Abbott's arthritis treatment Humira infringes Centocor's U.S. Patent No. 7,070,775. In a post-trial verdict, Judge Ward has rejected Abbott's defenses of inequitable conduct and laches. An appeal to the Federal Circuit will follow. [MCSmith][Patently-O Discussion of the Verdict].

Medela v. Kinetic Concepts: The Supreme Court has rejected Medela's petition for certiorari. The petition challenged the notion that a jury should decide the legal question of obviousness. [Supreme Court Docket]

Comments

[curious]

Thanks for posting. But that really is not many patent job openings nationwide.

[Alice in Wonderland]

Hey, Examiners, if a prosecutor repeatedly leaves you polite voice mail messages (because you choose not to answer your phone) asking for clarification of a particular point in an Office Action you issued for their case, do you call them back? If not, and the prosecutor called your supervisor as suggested at the end of the Office Action in order to try to get clarification from them, would you swear eternal vengeance on said prosecutor, or would you accept that they were just trying to do their job and not hold a grudge against them (assuming, of course, that they kept the discussion to the merits of the case and not how unprofessional they thought you were being).

[6]

"Hey, Examiners, if a prosecutor repeatedly leaves you polite voice mail messages (because you choose not to answer your phone) asking for clarification of a particular point in an Office Action you issued for their case, do you call them back?"

Am I on vacation? Otherwise yes, unless I'm feeling lazy.

" If not, and the prosecutor called your supervisor as suggested at the end of the Office Action in order to try to get clarification from them, would you swear eternal vengeance on said prosecutor, or would you accept that they were just trying to do their job and not hold a grudge against them (assuming, of course, that they kept the discussion to the merits of the case and not how unprofessional they thought you were being)."

I might swear eternal vengeance on said prosecutor anyway, since chances are high they are cluelessly prosecuting in ma art if they don't understand my OA, but them chatting with my boss I don't mind. Of course the rare exception does exist. And my boss on the other hand does not like for prosecutors to call him within a day or two of having called me, and you should probably be more worried about his swearing eternal vengeance than mine.

Also, I kind of doubt that any serious issue of OA interpretation in a case would be resolved by chatting with my spe about it. The serious ones are hard enough for me to resolve myself. But you're welcome to try.

[Tazistanjen@gmail.com]

I must be lucky. Examiners always call me back, at least after the second message. And if any have declared eternal vengeance on me, it wasn't where I could hear it. :-)

[Just an ordinary inventor(TM)]

Off subject question -- what do you think about Obama trying the terrorists juxtaposed where they struck?