Interference Decision Finding Patent Specifications To Have Presented “New Evidence” Was Harmless Error
Client Alert | 1 min read | 12.11.07
In In re Garner (No. 2007-1221; Interference No. 105,455; December 5, 2007), the Federal Circuit affirms the decision of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (“Board”), ruling against applicant Garner in a patent interference. Garner attempted to provoke an interference by copying claims from a patent issued to Quate and Stern (“Quate patent”). As the Quate patent had an earlier effective filing date than the Garner application, Garner, as the junior party, had the burden of establishing prior invention under 37 C.F.R. § 41.202(d)(1) (“Board Rule 202(d)(1)”). The Board found Garner’s initial filing insufficient to establish a prima facie showing of priority and issued a show-cause order under Board Rule 202(d)(2). In response to the show-cause order, Garner submitted several pieces of evidence, including the specification of his provisional application and the specification of his utility application. The Board rejected Garner’s submission, ruling that he had presented “new evidence” without the necessary showing of good cause.
On appeal, Garner argued that the Federal Circuit must review de novo the Board’s interpretation of its regulations and that the specifications he submitted in response to the show-cause order should not be considered new evidence. The panel rejects Garner’s assertion concerning de novo review, stating that it reviews regulations under a substantial deference standard. Using this standard, the panel determines that Garner’s patent specifications could not constitute new evidence given that they were already in the record pursuant to Board Rule 202(a)(5), and, therefore, the Board’s interpretation of Board Rule 202(d)(2) was erroneous. The panel, however, rules that the Board’s error was harmless, as consideration of Garner’s patent specifications would not have changed the Board’s decision on priority.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 4 min read | 08.29.25
Gender-Affirming Care Targeted for Potential False Claims Act Enforcement
On August 19, 2025, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) informed insurers participating in the Federal Employees Health Benefits or Postal Service Health Benefits programs that gender-affirming care would no longer be covered for federal workers starting in 2026. This coverage decision is the Trump Administration’s latest action stemming from Executive Order 14187 which aims to prevent certain treatments, such as gender-affirming hormone therapy, surgeries, and puberty blockers for those under the age of 19. As previously discussed, the Administration has also signaled its intent to use various law enforcement tools against gender-affirming care, including Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act to police false or unsupported claims by medical professionals about gender-affirming treatments.
Client Alert | 4 min read | 08.28.25
9th Circuit Marches Forward to the Future Finding Digital Assets Are Protected Under Trademark Law
Client Alert | 2 min read | 08.27.25
CPSC Maintains Momentum on eFiling Requirements for Consumer Products
Client Alert | 10 min read | 08.27.25
The New EU “Pharma Package”: Advertising – A Comparison of Commission/Parliament/Council Positions