Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 07 AUGUST 2014

Supplemental Expert Reports Cannot Be Submitted Via A Notice Of Reliance

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
Contributor
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP is one of the world’s largest firms focusing on...

View firm profile
Explore more from Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP

The TTAB recently clarified its procedures for making evidence of record through notices of reliance.

United StatesIntellectual Property

The TTAB recently clarified its procedures for making evidence of record through notices of reliance. After the close of its testimony period, Applicant sought to reopen the period in order to file an additional notice of reliance. The exhibits attached to this notice of reliance included a "Supplemental Expert Report" and the documents referenced in the report. The Board excluded the Supplemental Expert Report because it was not proper subject matter for introduction via a notice of reliance. The Board then considered the possibility that the report was admissible because the parties had so stipulated. The report was not admissible on this basis because the parties' stipulations covered the expert's initial report, but did not address the admissibility of any additional expert reports, affidavits, or declaration testimony. The report also did not qualify as proper supplementation under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure because, by Applicant's own admission, it

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from