lexisONE® Community

1. Tafas v. Doll, 2008-1352, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, March 20, 2009, Decided

OVERVIEW: 37 C.F.R. § 1.78 was held invalid because it attempted to add an additional requirement, that an application not contain amendments, arguments, or evidence that could have been submitted earlier, that was foreclosed by 35 U.S.C.S. § 120. That statute was clear and unambiguous, and Chevron deference was not applicable to the rule making.

« Back to Top