Comment Re:Extremely scary (Score 1) 211
You said that USC 135 cannot be used to delay a patent in a manner that counts toward it being extended.
1. Have you ever filed a petition to institute a derivation proceeding?
Almost no one has. First, under the pre-AIA rules, they were called interferences; derivations have only existed for a year. Second, there were 20 interferences per year, on average. Out of half a million patent applications. They're horribly expensive, and have little point. The fact that you reference that statute really indicates you have no idea what you're talking about.
As for 35 USC 156, do I need to handhold you through the million ways they can make a product subject to regulatory review? One way is to say is that it's going to be in a medical device or a medical device is going to use it.
Yes, and then you can't sell it in the meantime, nor can anyone else. Congratulations, the "40 year monopoly" you were ranting about just disappeared, since there's no mono.
And again, I should point out that (i) you failed to use the 'quote parent' button or otherwise quote me; (ii) failed to answer any questions from me to you; and (iii) changed the topic yet again, once I pointed out you were wrong. This is just pathetic.