Patents United States Patent and Trademark Office

News & Analysis as of

That’s Patentable? The Far-Reaching Definition of an “Invention”

U.S. patent law provides that “Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor,” 35 U.S. Code...more

Software Patents: History and Strategies (Pt. I – History)

1952-2010: Software Patents Historically (before Bilski and Alice) - For centuries in United States patent law, the question of patentability of the subject matter of an invention under 35 U.S.C. §101 was fairly...more

Certificate of Correction to Correct Information Not Available When Patent Issued

Cubist Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Hospira, [2015-1197, 2015-1204, 2015-1259] (November 12, 2015), the Federal Circuit approved the use of a Certificate of Correction to correct information not available at the time the...more

Software Patent Eligibility - A Post-Alice Landscape Discussion

•Why are people talking about Section 101/Alice? –Under Section 101, only “eligible subject matter” can be patented: ..“Abstract ideas” are not eligible –Courts + Patent Office are treating many software and...more

The USPTO Global Dossier Service Is Scheduled to Go Live in Mid-November

The Global Dossier is a project stemming from a collaboration between the European Patent Office (EPO), the Japan Patent Office (JPO), the Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO), the State Intellectual Property Office of...more

Ex parte Jung (PTAB 2015) - Computer-Readable Medium Claims vs. Printed Matter

Most software or computer-related patent applications today include a number of different types of claims, such as method claims, device claims, and computer-readable medium (CRM) claims. Such CRM claims are usually directed...more

USPTO Plans To Hike Patent Fees

The USPTO has published proposed changes to patent fees that it says will “slightly” increase patent prosecution fees–even though several common fees will increase by 10% to 25%. The proposed changes to the Information...more

MacroPoint, LLC v. FourKites, Inc. (N.D. Ohio 2015)

In a previous article on the USPTO's publication of its 2014 Interim Guidance on Patent Subject Matter Eligibility, we wrote: Despite the Interim Guidance offering a reasonably fair and thorough overview of the current...more

Farewell the ten sequences rule. The new MPEP disposes of the old §803.04 rule.

The latest MPEP revisions make a variety of changes. Most of the attention has focused on changes to examination procedures for 35 U.S.C. §101, for the obvious reason that this is an aspect of the law that has been in...more

Comments on the USPTO's Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance -- BSA

On July 30, 2015, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office updated its subject matter eligibility guidance ("July Update"). In the July Update, the Office provided recommendations and resources for examiners in addition to those...more

Preponderance Standard Applies to Ex Parte Re-examinations - Dome Patent L.P. v. Lee

Addressing the presumption of validity in ex parte re-examinations, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reiterated that the presumption of validity does not apply to patents under reexamination in the U.S....more

Claim Amendments Are Not Always What They Seem - R+L Carriers, Inc. v. Qualcomm, Inc.

Addressing whether language added to a claim during ex parte re-examination resulted in substantive changes, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the lower court’s dismissal of the infringement claims,...more

If Considered Material, False Statements Made to Federal Regulatory Bodies Create Exposure to Criminal Liability - United States...

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit reversed a conviction for making a false statement to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), holding that a false statement is not material if it could not influence the...more

No Review of PTAB Determination to Not Institute an IPR, Again - Achates Reference Publishing, Inc. v. Apple, Inc.

Addressing a decision by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) to not institute inter partes review IPR proceedings, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit concluded...more

URGENT: Change to Correction of Claims for Foreign Priority Dates

The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA) provides that the filing date of an earlier foreign patent application may now be the effective prior art date for subject matter disclosed in a U.S. patent or a U.S. patent...more

Comments on the USPTO's Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance -- The ABA

On July 30, 2015, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office updated its subject matter eligibility guidance ("July Update"). The update provided recommendations and resources for examiners in addition to those in the Office's...more

Wertheim, Dynamic Drinkware and the AIA

In Dynamic Drinkware, LLC v. National Graphics, Inc., the Federal Circuit held that in order for a patent to qualify as prior art as of its provisional application filing date, the provisional application must support the...more

3D Printing Partnership: 3D Medical Limited to Acquire Mach7 Technologies

3D Medical Limited (ASX: 3DM) recently announced that it has entered into a binding Heads of Agreement (HOA) to purchase 100% of shares issued in Mach7 Technologies. According to the agreement, 3D Medical will issue 460...more

Federal Circuit: Prior Disclosure Is Not Necessarily Prior Art - Dynamic Drinkware v. National Graphics

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board), finding that an IPR petitioner failed to meet its burden of proving that a cited prior art U.S. patent reference...more

Federal Circuit Review | October 2015

Federal Circuit Revives Possibility of Permanent Injunction in Apple-Samsung Patent Dispute - In Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Appeal No. 2014-1802, the Federal Circuit reversed for abuse of discretion the...more

ANDA Update - October 2015

Federal Circuit Interprets Statutory Requirements for Biosimilar Regulatory Pathway - Amgen Inc., v. Sandoz Inc., (Fed. Cir. July 21, 2015): In a case of first impression, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal...more

USPTO Revises Rules to Facilitate Access to Applications and File Contents by Foreign IP Offices

In a notice published earlier this week in the Federal Register (80 Fed. Reg. 65649), the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office issued a final rule revising the rules of practice to permit applicants to authorize the USPTO to give...more

Dueling Records: Are Statements in Your 510(k) Putting Your Patents at Risk?

Laboratory developed test (LDT) providers, previously exempt from U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) oversight, under a new FDA proposal, must now consider if their LDTs constitute moderate-risk (Class II) or high-risk...more

Morsa II: Admissions Enable Prior Art

In its 2013 decision in In re Morsa, the Federal Circuit vacated an anticipation rejection where “both the Board and the examiner failed to engage in a proper enablement analysis” to establish the enabling quality of the...more

PTAB Issues Questionable 101 Decision

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has likely seen an increase in the number of appealed rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 101 due to the Supreme Court's decision in Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v....more

957 Results
View per page
Page: of 39

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:

Sign up to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.