Tafas v. Dudas et al

Filing 135

MOTION for Summary Judgment by Triantafyllos Tafas. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Baden-Mayer, Joanna)

Tafas v. Dudas et al

Doc. 135 Att. 1

Case 1:07-cv-00846-JCC-TRJ

Document 135-2

Filed 12/20/2007

Page 1 of 3

EXHIBIT A: PROPOSED ORDER

DC01/BADEJ/321059.1

Dockets.Justia.com

Case 1:07-cv-00846-JCC-TRJ

Document 135-2

Filed 12/20/2007

Page 2 of 3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA (Alexandria Division)
TRIANTAFYLLOS TAFAS, Plaintiff, v. JON W. DUDAS, in his official capacity as UnderSecretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office, and the UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE, Defendants. CIVIL ACTION: 1:07cv846 (JCC/TRJ) and Consolidated Case (below)

SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORPORATION, Plaintiff, v. JON W. DUDAS, in his official capacity as UnderSecretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office, and the UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE, Defendants.

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF TRIANTAFYLLOS TAFAS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Having considered Plaintiff Triantafyllos Tafas' Motion for Summary Judgment dated December 20, 2007, the Memorandum in support of the Motion and all exhibits thereto, all other submissions and arguments concerning the Motion, and the entire record before the Court, it is this ____________ day of ___________________, 2008, ORDERED that the aforesaid Motion for Summary Judgment is granted, and it is FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants are permanently enjoined from implementing sections 1.75, 1.78, 1.104, 1.105, 1.110, 1.114, 1.142, 1.265 and 1.704 of certain

DC01/BADEJ/321059.1

1

Case 1:07-cv-00846-JCC-TRJ

Document 135-2

Filed 12/20/2007

Page 3 of 3

new federal regulations promulgated by the USPTO, with an effective date of November 1, 2007, which were published at 72 Fed. Reg. 46716, 46835-43 (Aug. 21, 2007) and are to be codified at 37 C.F.R. Part 1 (the "Revised Rules"); and it is FURTHER ORDERED that the Revised Rules are, in toto, null, void and without legal effect, inter alia, as being beyond the rule making power of the USPTO and as inconsistent with various federal statutes and the United States Constitution, including Article I, Section 8, Cl. 8 and the Fifth Amendment; and it is FURTHER ORDERED that the Revised Rules are vacated and remanded, and Defendants are required to comply with the requirements of the APA, 5 U.S.C. § 553, and the RFA, 5 U.S.C. § 601 et seq., in promulgating any regulations in the future concerning the subject matter of the Revised Rules.

_______________________________ United States District Court Judge

DC01/BADEJ/321059.1

2