The Business of Patents
If you practice law long enough, you see the pendulum shift between the respective rights of patent owners and accused infringers. The pendulum seems to be shifting, at least somewhat, back toward the inventors. In October of last year, John Squires, Director of the USPTO, issued a memorandum stating that he would be personally deciding […]
Read more →Inventors typically come to us with an idea of what they think is new about their invention. Usually, they have not done a prior art search, and as a result, are sometimes overly optimistic about the breadth of a patent they might ultimately obtain. Once we do a search, the scope of what is “new” – and […]
Read more →On more than one occasion we have heard a client express surprise or frustration that the Patent Office issued one of their competitors a patent which seems invalid because it claims something known in the “prior art” or has some overly broad claims relative to the prior art. This can be especially frustrating if the client […]
Read more →It is sometimes the case that the real driver of value in a patented machine or system is in the aftermarket for replaceable components. The problem is that, on their own, the replaceable components often lack any unique functionality and are unprotectable with utility patents. As a result, competitors can freely sell the replaceable components because the […]
Read more →With the incredible advances in computing technology over the last 20 years has come a vast array of inventions that are implemented in some form of software. Smartphone apps, TV apps, manufacturing processes, facial recognition technology, artificial intelligence program, the list of products and processes that rely on some form of software is endless. Some […]
Read more →Sometimes the best defense is a good offense. Clients often assume that they are entitled to a patent because no single piece of prior art shows all of their invention. In that case the invention may be novel. However, it does not mean that it is non-obvious. To qualify for a U.S. patent, an invention […]
Read more →Pros and Cons of Apparatus and Method of Use Claims Devices or apparatuses can often be protected by using two kinds of patent claims: apparatus and method of use claims. Each approach has its benefits and drawbacks. In general, apparatus claims expand the class of direct infringers relative to method of use claims but are […]
Read more →Well, we thought so, but now we are not so sure. It seems that the much more is required than the business method itself in order to obtain a patent. The cases suggest that, at a minimum, novel computing features are required. The Federal Circuit’s most recent pronouncement on the issue seems to change little […]
Read more →Clients often want to know how long it will take them to get a patent. Of course, whether they get one at all will depend on whether their invention is novel and non-obvious as well as how broadly their claims are drafted. However, those questions aside, there is also the issue of how quickly the […]
Read more →