Reissue, Reexamination, and Supplemental Examination Strategies and Insights – September 2026

In the mid-2000s, the U.S. Patent Office (USPTO) determined that reexaminations would be more consistent and legally correct if performed by a centralized set of experienced and specially trained Examiners. As a result, the USPTO formed the Central Reexamination Unit (CRU) and staffed it with 15 year+ Examiners and legal experts. Later, after the loss of Inter Partes Reexamination in 2012, the USPTO added all newly filed reissue applications to the CRU Examiner’s regime.

Sterne Kessler’s utility and design reissue, reexamination, and supplemental examination team will share practice tips and insights into prosecuting these proceedings before this specialized examination group within the USPTO.

This month, we discuss the latest guidance on analogous art from the decision in Nielsen Company (US), LLC v. TVision Insights, Inc., compare key procedural, strategic, and practical differences among EPR, PTAB, and ITC proceedings, and discuss the key takeaways from our recent Navigating the New PTAB Playing Field webinar.

In This Issue:

• Analogous Art After the Nielsen Company (US), LLC v. TVision Insights, Inc.: Implicit Theories and Broadly Framed Problems
• Ex Parte Reexamination, American Invents Act, and International Trade Commission Proceedings—A Compare and Contrast Primer
• Key Takeaways from Session 10: Navigating the New PTAB Playing Field