What gives an inventor provisional rights? Recently a client asked me to sue a competitor for infringement on her patent application. I told her that even though you can mark articles with the terms “Patent Applied For” or “Patent Pending” these phrases have no legal effect, but only give information that an application for patent has […]
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has prepared further interim guidance for the patent examining corps to use when determining subject matter eligibility hof a business method patent application under 35 U.S.C. § 101 in view of the recent decision by the United States Supreme Court in Bilski v. Kappos (.PDF). This […]
Tweet of the week Thanks to @ifones for tweeting this week about how Apple may take on a new role in video gaming if its latest patent application, published by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office last week, ever makes it into a product. Take a look how Patently Apple breaks down the Apple patent […]
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) web page is not very user friendly when searching for prior art patents. But I found an add-on for Firefox called Aspator that makes it much friendlier. The Aspator add-on works with search pages for patents and patent applications on the USPTO and the European Patent Office […]
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.C. 101 A patent on an invention may not be obtained if the differences between the invention sought to be patented and the prior art are such […]
In an effort to push forward patent reform, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) posted a press release using the highly publicized Supreme Court decision in Bilski v. Kappos (.PDF) as a reason as to why reform is needed. Bilski affirmed a Federal Circuit decision denying a patent for a process for hedging on […]
Almost immediately after the Supreme Court handed down the Bilski decision Robert W. Bahr, Acting Associate Commissioner for Patent Examination Policy sent a memorandum to the patent examining corps which gave guidance as to how the USTPO examiners should interpret the case. Bahr told examiners to examine patent applications for compliance with section 101 using […]
To summarize today’s Supreme Court ruling in Bilski (PDF), business method patents remain viable subject matter and the machine-or-transformation test enunciated as the sole test by the Federal Circuit is not the exclusive test, but merely one tool in the Examiner toolbox. The court affirmed that Bilski’s risk-management method was not patentable subject matter. “Indeed, […]
What’s taking the Supreme Court so long to hand down an opinion on the Bilski vs Kappos case? Bilski was argued on Nov. 9, 2009… 225 days ago. There has been much speculation that the decision will be published when the Supreme Court next releases its opinions on Thursday (June 24, 2010) or next Monday. […]
What is patentable subject matter? Many people believe that they can patent anything. But the truth is there is only certain statutorily allowable subject matter that can be patented (35 USC 101). Here’s a list of the basic allowable subject matter: Process (Method of making infrared heaters which reduces costs by 25%) Machine (Motorized device […]