In Re Robert Goodman, Vic C. Knauf, Catherine M. Houch and Luca Comai

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that PTO actions did not dictate the rate of prosecution when Goodman accepted early issuance of species claims and filed a continuation application to prosecute genus claims
• noting that patentee’s election to file a continuation in lieu of seeking an immediate appeal was evidence of patentee’s control over the pace of prosecution
• noting that patentee’s election to file a continuation in lieu of seeking an immediate appeal was evidence of paten-tee’s control over the pace of prosecution
• finding that certain claims of the application were “generic to the species of invention covered by” a claim of the patent, without reference to any “prior art”
• advising that the two-way test should be applied when “there is administrative delay”
• explaining that a terminal disclaimer can overcome a double patenting “rejection”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).