In Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research v. Iancu, No. 2018-2031 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 16, 2019), the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court's decision that Patent Term Adjustment is reduced by the period after an interference concludes and the issuance of a notice of allowance, where the interference follows the filing of a Request for Continued Examination. The court rejected Mayo's argument that an interference is equivalent to a Notice of Allowance because claims must be "deemed allowable" to enter an interference. The court explained that the "[USPTO] regulations as a whole do not indicate that a declaration of an interference is tantamount to a Notice of Allowance." Judge Newman dissented, reasoning that Mayo had not requested further examination after the interference and that the majority's result is contrary to patent policy. Further discussion of the decision can be found on Finnegan's Federal Circuit IP Blog.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.