« Waiving Under Willfulness | Main | As Nutty As Squirrel Poo »

August 23, 2007

Tilt

Instantly taking umbrage at the USPTO's new Byzantine rules for limiting examination, uppity Greece-born inventor Dr. Triantafyllos Tafas filed suit in the home court of the PTO, the Eastern District of Virginia, against the agency and its head honcho, Jon Dudas. According to Tafas, the new rules violate the Constitution, the Patent Act of 1952, and, in the run-up to promulgation, the rule-making procedures of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).

The complaint alleges:

The Revised Rules should be preliminarily and permanently enjoyed [sic - enjoined] and declared null and void because, among other things, they violate: (1) Sections 2, 120, 131, 132 and 365 of the Patent Act (35 U.S.C. §§ 1 . et seq.) by exceeding the rule making authority delegated to the Defendants by Congress; (2) Sections 553(c) and 706(2) of the APA (5 U.S.C. §§ 553(c) and 706(2) by, among other things, purporting to enact rules with retroactive effect; failing to consider all the relevant matter presented as required by 5 U.S.C. § 553(c); and, by promulgating rules that are arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, otherwise not in accordance with law, contrary to Plaintiffs constitutional rights and in excess of the USPTO's statutory jurisdiction and authority; and (3) Article I, Section 8, Cl. 8 and the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution.

No provision in Section 132 [of the Patent Act of 1952] empowers the Director to deny a continued examination of an application or to promulgate regulations having the effect of denying an applicant a continued examination of an application. The Revised Rules are contrary to Section 132(b), which requires the Director to provide for the continued examination of patent applications at the request of the applicant. 35 U.S.C. § 132(b).

[T]he USPTO has failed to meet its obligations under the APA by, inter alia, failing to consider all the relevant matter presented as required by 5 U.S.C. § 553(c) and by promulgating rules that are arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, otherwise not in accordance with law, contrary to Plaintiff's constitutional rights and in excess of the USPTO's statutory jurisdiction and authority in violation of 5 U.S.C. § 706(2).

Dr. Tafas "has been injured and faces continuing irreparable injury due to the Revised Rules... Dr. Tafas cannot be made whole by money damages because there is no way to calculate the value of potential inventions that could flow from Dr. Tafas' original application."

Posted by Patent Hawk at August 23, 2007 11:37 AM | The Patent Office

Comments

Post a comment




Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)