Interval Licensing LLC v. AOL, Inc. et al

Filing 199

DECLARATION of Mark P. Walters filed by Defendant Yahoo! Inc re #198 Joint MOTION to Stay by all Defendants filed (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C, #4 Exhibit D, #5 Exhibit E, #6 Exhibit F, #7 Exhibit G, #8 Exhibit H - 1, #9 Exhibit H - 2, #10 Exhibit H - 3, #11 Exhibit H - 4, #12 Exhibit H - 5, #13 Exhibit I, #14 Exhibit J)(Walters, Mark)

Interval Licensing LLC v. eBay, Inc. et al

Doc. 199 Att. 13

EXHIBIT I

Dockets.Justia.com

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
Commissioner for Patents United States Patent and Trademark Office P.O. Box 1450 Alexandria, VA 22313-1450 www.uspto.gov

Ex Parte Reexamination Filing Data - December 31, 2010 1. Total requests filed since start of ex parte reexam on 07/01/81................................... 11211 1 a. By patent owner b. By other member of public c. By order of Commissioner 2. Number of filings by discipline a. b. c. d. 3. Chemical Operation Electrical Operation Mechanical Operation Design Patents 3104 4106 3824 177 28% 37% 34% 1% 3715 7331 165 33% 66% 1%

Annual Ex Parte Reexam Filings Fiscal Yr. 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 No. 78 (3 mos.) 187 186 189 230 232 240 268 Fiscal Yr. No. 1989 243 1990 297 1991 307 1992 392 1993 359 1994 379 1995 392 1996 418 Fiscal Yr. 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 No. 376 350 385 318 296 272 392 441 Fiscal Yr. 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011YTD
...........

No. 524 511 643 680 658 780 188

4. 5.

Number known to be in litigation............................................... .3639...............32% Decisions on requests.............................................................................10705 a. No. granted............................................................ ...9835................ 92%
..... ......

(1) By examiner (2) By Director (on petition)

9720 115

b. No. denied ..................................................................870..................8% (1) By examiner (2) Reexam vacated 835 35

1 Of the requests received in FY 2011, 7 requests have not yet been accorded a filing date, and preprocessing of 6 requests was terminated for failure to comply with the requirements of 37 CFR 1.510. See Clarification of Filing Date Requirements for Ex Parte and Inter Partes Reexamination Proceedings, Final Rule, 71 Fed. Reg. 44219 (August 4, 2006).

1

6.

Total examiner denials (includes denials reversed by Director).....................................950 a. Patent owner requester b. Third party requester 455 495 48% 52%

7.

Overall reexamination pendency (Filing date to certificate issue date) a. Average pendency b. Median pendency 25.6 (mos.) 20.0 (mos.) Owner Requester 21% 9% 70% 3rd Party Requester 24% 13% 63% Comm'r Initiated 12% 23% 65% Overall 23% 12% 65%

8.

Reexam certificate claim analysis: a. b. c. All claims confirmed All claims cancelled Claims changes

9.

Total ex parte reexamination certificates issued (1981 ­ present) ...........................7952 a. Certificates with all claims confirmed b. Certificates with all claims canceled c. Certificates with claims changes 1843 914 5195 23% 12% 65%

10. Reexam claim analysis ­ requester is patent owner or 3rd party or Commissioner initiated. a. Certificates ­ PATENT OWNER REQUESTER .........................................2971 (1) All claims confirmed (2) All claims canceled (3) Claim changes b. 641 257 2073 21% 9% 70%

Certificates ­ 3rd PARTY REQUESTER ..................................................4826 (1) All claims confirmed (2) All claims canceled (3) Claim changes 1184 622 3020 24% 13% 63%

c.

Certificates ­ COMMISSIONER INITIATED REEXAM ................................155 (1) All claims confirmed (2) All claims canceled (3) Claim changes 18 35 102 12% 23% 65%

2