• House Small Business Committee Holds Hearing on ZTE Sanctions, Chinese Cybersecurity Threats

    Several weeks ago, the House Small Business Committee held a hearing titled ZTE: A Threat to America’s Small Businesses to explore the economic and national security threats posed by the Chinese telecommunications equipment and systems firm ZTE. The day’s discussion focused on ways that American small businesses could protect themselves from ZTE specifically and Chinese-backed entities more generally as well as the mixed signals being sent by the administration of President Donald Trump…

    Continue Reading ...
  • 高度



    $$ For example, in place of the P.I.D. controller some other closed loop controller based on advanced control theory such as a state space or "H infinity" or sliding mode controller could be used. / たとえば、P.I.D.コントローラの代わりに、状態空間、「H infinity」、またはスライディング・モード・コントローラなどの高度な制御理論に基づく他の閉ループ・コントローラを使用することができる。(USP8108108)

    $$ These advanced tracking algorithms are appropriate where the target dynamics may vary between a number of dynamic regimes. / これらの高度な追跡アルゴリズムは、目標のダイナミクスが多くの力学的状態の間で変化することがある場合に適切である。(USP8089393)

    $$ The ease of use and advanced diagnostics of the data-logging system means that problems hidden deep in a drive system can be identified without the need for dismantling it thereby avoiding the attendant disruption and down time. / データロギングシステムの使い易さ及び高度な診断法は、駆動システムにおいて深く隠れた問題を、それを分解する必要なしに確認することができ、これにより付随した破壊及び停止時間が避けられることを意味する。(USP7634949)

    $$ The side sections 22 each have a high degree of longitudinal curvature. / 各側部22は高度の縦方向湾曲を有する。(USP8459060)

    $$ As a result the specimen may appear highly structured (having dark and bright areas) or may be weakly fluorescent. / この結果、試料は、(明暗領域を有して)高度に構築されるか、または弱い蛍光性となり得る。(USP6570143)

    $$ This permits an unpredictably occurring event to be captured at high temporal resolution. / これにより予測できない事象発生を高度な時間的解像度で捕らえることができる。(USP6157409)

    $$ This effect is due to the area of high turbulence created at the edge of the nozzles at high gas velocities. / この効果は高速ガスにおいてノズルの縁部に生じた高度の乱流の領域による。(USPA01020503)

    $$ The result is that a highly linear VCXO is achieved with constant voltage sensitivity over the temperature range. / その結果、温度領域全体にわたって一定の電圧感度を備えた高度線形VCXOが達成される。(USP7573345)

    $$ To enable this functionality, sophisticated and bulky drive systems are required. / この位置合わせを行うために非常に嵩張り、かつ、高度な駆動システムが必要になる。(USP8397779)

    $$ More sophisticated common rail fuel injector systems in diesel engines can be used to meter very precise quantities of fuel to adjust exhaust gas composition. / ディーゼルエンジンにおけるより高度化されたコモンレール燃料噴射装置を使用し、非常に正確な量の燃料を計量し、排ガス組成を調節することもできる。(USP8756926)

    $$ Alternatively, more sophisticated detection can be done, for example using a spectrofluorimeter or a fluorimeter with more than one optical detector. / 或いは、この代わりに、例えば、複数の光検出器を有する蛍光分光計又は蛍光計を使用することにより、更に高度な検出を実行することも可能である。(USP7652266)

    $$ They are being added to frequently with ever increasing coverage of the Web and sophistication of search engines. / しばしば常に増大しているウェブのカバー範囲と検索エンジンの高度化に加えられているところである。(USP6353827)

    $$ In a further preferred embodiment the system is provided with a GPS so that the date, time and location (altitude, longitude and latitude) of the position where the sample was taken can be recorded. / 更に好ましい態様では、試料が採取される位置の期日、時刻および場所(高度、経度および緯度)が記録できるように、本システムはGPSを具備している。(USP7578972)

    $$ The system is not restricted to any particular constellation of satellites, but may advantageously be applied to satellites in low earth orbits of less than 2000 km altitude or medium earth orbits of between 10,000 and 20,000 km altitude. / 本システムは、特定の一群の衛星に制限されるものではなく、高度2000km未満の低軌道上の衛星や、高度10,000~20,000kmの中高度軌道上の衛星にも好適に適用することができる。(USPA01046481)

    $$ In more than 3 communications satellites 10 10′ are so used, the user terminal 44 may be absolutely located in space, also allowing for altitude variations on the surface of the earth 14. / もし、4以上の通信衛星10,10’がそのように使用されるならば、使用者端末44は、空間内に絶対的に位置してもよく、また、地球14の表面上の高度変動を許可する。(USP6031489)

    $$ It has a pole connected to an elevation DDS local oscillator 312F. / 第二SPDTスイッチ314は極を高度DDS局部発振器312Fに接続する。(USP6441783)

    $$ The sets of elements suffixed E, A and S define elevation, azimuth and sum channels to which further channels may be added. / 接尾記号E、A、Sを付したエレメント群は、更なるチャンネルが付加される高度、方位角、及び総和値のチャンネルを規定する。(USP6441783)

    $$ The beam of light may be scanned in both azimuth and elevation across the scene to generate range information from across the whole scene. / 光のビームは、全光景に亘る距離情報を生成するために、光景に亘って方位と高度の両方に走査することができる。(USP7589825)

    $$ Furthermore, it is possible for the aspiration conduit to fill with exudate fluid resulting in a pressure differential between the wound and the vacuum source due to the viscous drag of the exudate and the height differential between wound and vacuum source. / さらに、吸引管路が滲出物流体で満たされる可能性があり、その結果、滲出物の粘性抗力と創傷と真空源との間の高度差とにより、創傷と真空源の間に圧力差が生じる。(USP8734410)

    $$ Other sampling rates and communications satellite orbital heights are chosen, other optimum numbers of measurement apply. / もし、他のサンプリングレートおよび通信衛星軌道高度が選択されたならば、他の最適数の測定が適用する。(USP6031489)


    Continue Reading ...
  • Federal Circuit: USPTO Is Not Entitled to Attorneys’ Fees Under Section 145

    The en banc decision in NantKwest v. Iancu is available here.  (7-4 majority opinion by Judge Stoll, dissent by Chief Judge Prost.)  As I discussed in my blog post from June 2017, following the original panel decision: 
    The examiner and the PTAB rejected the inventor’s patent application on nonobviousness grounds, and rather than immediately appealing to the Federal Circuit (which is one option under these circumstances) the applicant initiated a lawsuit against the director in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia (which is another, less commonly invoked, option).  The district court ruled in favor of the director, and in May the Federal Circuit affirmed (here).  The district court also awarded the director expert witness fees but denied a request for attorney’s fees. On appeal of this matter, the Federal Circuit (in an opinion by Chief Judge Prost) concludes that the relevant statute–which in the present context is not35 U.S.C. § 285, but rather 35 U.S.C. § 145–requires the court to award both expert and attorneys’ fees–and, although it isn’t at issue in this case, since the director won–the rule applies regardless of outcome.
    The Federal Circuit thereafter  agreed to rehear the case en banc, and as I stated in a follow-up post from this past March:
    [T]hough I’m sure its resolution is important to the parties, I suspect that the number of § 145 cases filed every year is quite small, so whatever the result is its systemic effect will be pretty limited.  For what it’s worth, I’m inclined to think the en banc court will reverse the panel, though again I haven’t read the briefs or otherwise immersed myself in considering the question presented.
    So I called this one correctly, hooray for me.  The relevant statute reads as follows: 
    An applicant dissatisfied with the decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board in an appeal under section 134(a) may, unless appeal has been taken to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, have remedy by civil action against the Director in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia if commenced within such time after such decision, not less than sixty days, as the Director appoints. The court may adjudge that such applicant is entitled to receive a patent for his invention, as specified in any of his claims involved in the decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, as the facts in the case may appear and such adjudication shall authorize the Director to issue such patent on compliance with the requirements of law. All the expenses of the proceedings shall be paid by the applicant.
    The majority today writes:
    Historically, the agency relied on this provision to recover sums it spent on travel and printing and, more recently, expert witnesses. Now, 170 years after Congress introduced § 145’s predecessor, the agency argues that § 145 also compels applicants to pay its attorneys’ fees. We hold that it does not, for the American Rule prohibits courts from shifting attorneys’ fees from one party to another absent a “specific and explicit” directive from Congress. The phrase “[a]ll the expenses of the proceedings” falls short of this stringent standard. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment (p.1).
    Both the majority and dissent go through a great deal of history, statutory interpretation, comparison to other statutory provisions found throughout the United States Code, etc.   I’m no expert on this particular topic, but as I stated in my earlier blog post I’m not surprised at the outcome, nor terribly excited about the topic itself–though the fact that the decision today creates a conflict with the Fourth Circuit’s interpretation of an analogous statute applicable in trademark matters could, I suppose, induce the Supreme Court to consider hearing the case, if asked.
    Continue Reading ...