This year our panel of industry insiders is quite diverse, with commentary from Bob Stoll (Drinker Biddle), Ashley Keller (Gerchen Keller), Paul Morinville (US Inventor), Alden Abbot (Heritage Foundation), Marla Grossman (American Continental Group) an…Continue Reading ...
Takeaway: The Board was persuaded to follow similar claim construction positions as well as its previous determination related to patent eligibility made in previous proceedings before the Board related to the same and similar patents. In its Decision, the Board … Continue reading →
The post Instituting Review of Challenged Claims CBM2015-00091 appeared first on PTAB Trial Blog.Continue Reading ...
Before his recent arrest, Martin Shkreli, the former CEO of Turing Pharmaceuticals, gained notoriety for increasing the price of the AIDS drug Daraprim® (pyrimethamine) from about $13.50 to about $750 per pill. He also was reported to be considering a similar price hike for benznidazole, for which his new company, KaloBios Pharmaceuticals, was going to seek … Continue reading this entryContinue Reading ...
Gene Quinn: USPTO Experiences Catastrophic Failure Of Electronic Patent And Trademark Systems Jacob Gershman: Bluebook Critics Incite Copyright Clash Bill Reid: The Ghost Of Christmas Patents Eriq Gardner: Grumpy Cat Brings Grumpy Lawsuit Over Infringement Of Intellectual Property Apple Signs Peace Deal With Ericsson Steve Brachmann: The Top 10 Patents Issued In 2015 Get a […]Continue Reading ...
On December 22, 2015, at approximately 7:00 pm, the USPTO experienced a catastrophic failure of electronic information systems due to what is being called a major power outage at the Office’s headquarters in Alexandria, Virginia. Could a power outage b…Continue Reading ...
Takeaway: Merely alleging that funds from a hedge fund are being used in a proceeding, without more, is insufficient to constitute more than a mere possibility that something useful will be discovered as evidence of a real-party-in-interest. In its Decision, … Continue reading →
The post Additional Discovery Regarding Real-Party-In-Interest Denied IPR2015-01046 appeared first on PTAB Trial Blog.Continue Reading ...
Takeaway: A party is not required to cross-examine a declarant at the time when the opposing party is first served with the declaration; rather, cross-examination can take place after supplemental evidence relating to the direct testimony has been filed. In … Continue reading →
The post Authorized To Cross-Examine After Declaration Was Filed Regardless Of Service Date IPR2015-00014 appeared first on PTAB Trial Blog.Continue Reading ...
2015 was a truly remarkable year for innovation and we saw major trends in self-driving cars, wearable technologies, digital wallets and much more. I hope you will enjoy this top 10 listing, which includes innovations for providing water in arid region…Continue Reading ...
Within a post at Techrights, one finds the text:
This new blog post titled “Another depressing year for patent law?” says a lot about how practitioners in the US view the USPTO. Watch how this US patent lawyer, Lawrence B. Ebert, quoting Larry Downes as saying: “On just one day in November, for example, over 200 new patent lawsuits were filed, as plaintiffs rushed to beat a change in federal procedure that could require more specific claims. Most were from companies that buy up patents of dubious quality and use them to extract nuisance settlements from actual innovators.”
Is this what Europe is hoping to achieve? We wrote thousands of articles about the USPTO and we have great (and growing) fear that those same disasters (and patent predators) will reach Europe. Some already do
Aside from the observation that the text beginning “Watch how…” is not a complete sentence, one notes that the filings on November 30 were in anticipation of different pleading requirements after Form 18 was removed from the appendix of the Federal Rules. Going forward, pleading complaints in US patent cases needs to more specific.
Of humor, even an episode of “The Good Wife” [KSR] referenced this matter. [As one bit of trivia, Larry Downes and LBE are both University of Chicago Law, ’93]
**Other text in the article was of interest:
The last point suggests to us that the Team Battistelli-led EPO is gradually emulating the notorious USPTO (very deeply involved in and dominated by large corporations, with terrible grant rates).
The “terrible grant rates” link is –http://www.vox.com/2014/5/5/5682926/getting-patents-is-preposterously-easy-under-obama — which in turn leads one to
– http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/04/study-suggests-patent-office-lowered-standards-to-cope-with-backlog/ –, an article by Timothy B. Lee on Apr 7, 2013 6:45pm EDT, which begins:
When David Kappos announced his resignation as head of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) late last year, one of his most touted accomplishments was a significant reduction in the backlog of pending patent applications. Kappos’ fans have attributed this to the hiring of hundreds of additional patent examiners.
But a new study suggests another explanation for the declining backlog: the patent office may have lowered its standards, approving many patents that would have been (and in some cases, had been) rejected under the administration of George W. Bush. The authors—Chris Cotropia and Cecil Quillen of the University of Richmond and independent researcher Ogden Webster—used Freedom of Information Act requests to obtain detailed data about the fate of patent applications considered by the USPTO since 1996.
They found that the “allowance rate,” the fraction of applications approved by the patent office, declined steadily from 2001 and 2009. But in the last four years there’s been a sharp reversal, with a 2012 allowance rate about 20 percent higher than it was in 2009.
Presumably, this “new study” refers to Patent Applications and the Performance of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, 23 Fed. Cir. Bar J. 179 (2013) (with Cecil D. Quillen, Jr. and Ogden H. Webster).
The link for this article on the Cotropia website is to an article by Cotropia:
Patent Applications and the Performance of the U.S.
Patent and Trademark Office
Christopher A. Cotropia
University of Richmond, email@example.com, with the recommended citation:
Christoper A. Cotropia, Cecil D. Quillen, Jr. & Ogden H. Webster, Patent Applications and the Performance of the U.S. Patent and
Trademark Office, 23 Fed. Cir. B.J. 179 (2013).
A footnote mentions previous publications by Quillen and Webster in this area:
See Cecil D. Quillen, Jr. & Ogden H. Webster, Continuing Patent Applications and
Performance of the US. Patent and Trademark Office, 11 Fed. Cir. B.). 1 (2001) [hereinafter
Quillen I]; Cecil D. Quillen, Jr. et al., Continuing Patent Applications and Performance of the
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office-Extended, 12 Fed. Cir. B.). 35 (2002) [hereinafter Quillen
II]; Cecil D. Quillen, Jr. &Ogden H. Webster, ContinuingPatentApplicationsandPerformance
ofthe U.S. Patent and Trademark Office-Updated, 15 Fed. Cir. B.J. 635 (2006) [hereinafter
Quillen III]; Cecil D. Quillen, Jr. & Ogden H. Webster, Continuing Patent Applications and
Performance of the US. Patent and Trademark Office-One More Time, 18 Fed. Cir. B.J. 3 79
(2009) [hereinafter Quillen IV]. See Quillen IV, at 380-83 and accompanying notes, for an
overview of these previous Articles.
The 2013 article makes no reference whatsoever to published criticisms of the Quillen/Webster methodology.
IPBiz referred to the third Quillen/Webster paper [ Continuing Patent Applications and Performance of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office–One More Time, 18 FED. CIR. B.J. 379 (2009). ] in a 2014 post Patent “Quality”, again and included a reference to a paper showing the errors of the Quillen/Webster approach:
LBE, Comment on “Patent Grant Rates at the United States Patent and Trademark Office” , 4 Chi.-Kent J. Intell. Prop. 186 (2005), with text
we suggest that Quillen and Webster’s elevated grant rates arise from a flawed numerical approach.
**Separately, Lemley and Sampat wrote in the “rubber stamp” paper: We find that the PTO rejects a surprisingly high percentage of patents. While more than
two-thirds of all applications result in at least one patent, a significant number of applications are
rejected and then finally abandoned by the applicant.
which includes a footnote:Continue Reading ...
We thank Lawrence Ebert for raising this concern. Lawrence Ebert, More on Patent Grant Rate; the USPTO Is NOT a Rubber
Stamp, IPBIZ, Aug. 2, 2007, http://ipbiz.blogspot.com/2007/08/more-on-patent-grant-rate-uspto-is-not.html.
On December 18, 2015, several amici filed a brief in support of appellants in Netflix, Inc. v. Rovi Corp. et al., No. 15-1917 at the Federal Circuit. The amici Broadband iTV, Inc., Double Rock Corporation, Island Intellectual Property, LLC, Access Con…Continue Reading ...
Earlier this month, Napa Valley Vintners (NVV), the nonprofit trade association that works to “promote, protect and enhance the Napa Valley appellation,” became the first wine group in the U.S. to be granted a certification mark registration. So-called certification marks are a unique species within the trademark law, functioning to “certify” the nature or origin of goods or services, rather than merely convey the producer of those goods or services.
The post Napa Valley Vintners first wine…
Continue Reading ...
Texas Instruments has earned 825 U.S. patents through most of 2015, putting it on pace to perhaps slightly eclipse its 2014 totals. As the text cluster posted here shows our readers, much of TI’s recent R&D has focused on control signals, input signals and semiconductor devices… Short-range, low-power body area networks developed for medical purposes were featured by a pair of patent applications filed recently by Texas Instruments, including the innovation described within U.S. Patent…
Continue Reading ...
By Kevin E. Noonan — Mistakes happen; there is even a book, entitled Human Error, that discusses how and why they happen. The Federal Circuit addressed the consequences of human error (or perhaps more accurately, instances where there was a less-than-…Continue Reading ...
Author: Benjamin A. Saidman Editor: Lauren J. Dreyer Monday January 4, 2016 Acorda Therapeutics v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals, No. 15-1456 and AstraZeneca v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals, No. 15-1460 – Courtroom 201 In two cases drawing significant amicus participation, Mylan challenges the district court’s determination that Mylan, a paragraph IV ANDA applicant, is subject to personal jurisdiction in […]Continue Reading ...
Commil USA, LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc., __ F.3d __ (Fed. Cir. 2015) On remand from the Supreme Court, the Federal Circuit has again concluded that the jury’s infringement verdict was wrong – but this time altering the grounds for its decision. “We now conclude that substantial evidence does not support the jury’s finding that […]Continue Reading ...
Takeaway: A motion for late submission of supplemental information under § 42.123(b) must show why the supplemental information reasonably could not have been obtained earlier and that consideration of the supplemental information would be in the interests of justice. In … Continue reading →Continue Reading ...
Takeaway: When the Patent Owner Preliminary Response raises an issue concerning standing of Petitioner, the Board may authorize Petitioner to file a Reply limited to addressing the standing issue. In its Order, the Board authorized Petitioner to file a Reply … Continue reading →
The post Reply to Preliminary Response Authorized To Address Standing CBM2015-00168, 178 appeared first on PTAB Trial Blog.Continue Reading ...
Over the last decade, there has been a movement among the software developer community to employ some form of “agile development” rather than the traditional software development methodology. The belief is that these agile methodologies lead to higher quality software and faster development cycles. More recently, the implementation of agile software development has transitioned not only from small startups to large companies, but also from enterprises developing noncritical, consumer apps to…
Continue Reading ...
By Donald Zuhn — Although the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has not yet made a formal announcement on the USPTO Systems Status and Availability webpage or the Office’s Facebook and Twitter accounts, it appears that the Office has now restored acces…Continue Reading ...
Charles Osgood introduced the stories for Sunday, December 27.Mark Strassman reports cover story on weather.Jane Pauley on Gil Battle. ostrich egg art.Mo Rocca on Dame Maggie Smith. Downton Abbey. Hail and Farewell. Headlines. Subject is weather….Continue Reading ...
- Guest Post: Intellectual Property, Finance and Corporate Governance
- USPTO Issues Guidance on Effects of Supreme Court’s Decision in SAS Institute on PTAB Trials
- USPTO Guidance for Dealing with SAS Decision
- Senators Discuss Counterfeits at GIPC, INTA Forum for World IP Day
- President Donald J. Trump Proclaims April 26, 2018, as World Intellectual Property Day