Posts in IPWatchdog Articles

At one point during his remarks last night President Obama said: “Nobody rushes on the field and dumps Gatorade on them (laughter) when you win a science award. Maybe they should!” Indeed we should celebrate science and math victories every much, if not more, than we celebrate sports victories, but that is not our culture unfortunately. We need to change our culture to raise the profile of those who are succeeding on every level in the scientific fields. President Obama can play a major role in bringing about that change, and his raising the profile of those who are science fair winners is certainly encouraging.

During his remarks last night President Obama was in typical form, interchangably jovial and serious. The event left one feeling that President Obama would like very much for science education to become a priority. What follows is a transcript of President Obama’s remarks, followed by information about each of the Medal recipients, their research and innovations that lead each being selected for recognition.

Earlier this evening President Barack Obama awarded National Medals to 16 distinguished scientists and engineers in a ceremony in the East Room of the White House. Without further ado, here is my photo diary of the 2009 National Medal of Science and 2009 National Medal of Technology and Innovation awards ceremony.

Later today President Barack Obama will honor the 2010 recipients of both the National Medal of Science and the National Medal of Technology and Innovation. I have been granted press credentials by the White House to cover this event, so check back tomorrow for my first hand account of the awards ceremony and a birds eye view of the event from inside the White House.

On October 12, 2010, I had the honor of interviewing retired United States Senator Birch Bayh, who was the primary architect of the landmark Bayh-Dole Act. In this second and final installment of my interview with Senator Bayh we will discuss the aforementioned loft praise for Bayh-Dole, which came from The Economist. We will also discuss statements of Vice President Biden (when he was a United States Senator) regarding the tremendous success of Bayh-Dole, how the United States can stay on the cutting edge of technology, and how to successfully lobby for changes in the patent system.

The United States Patent and Trademark Office today issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that proposes changes to the rules governing ex parte patent appeals before the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences. The notice requests public comment on the proposed changes, which include rescinding the highly unpopular 2008 Final Rule, implementation of which has been stayed.

Godici told me that those who are not familiar with Three Track will soon need to familiarize themselves because this is going to happen. “This time next year we will be operating in some kind of a Three Track system,” Godici predicted. He went on to say: “These rules are pretty significant from a practitioner standpoint,” because there will be “layers of questions” and opportunities to strategize with respect to the application process.

Unfortunately for those who support a single European patent, negotiations broke down on Wednesday evening and the status quo will remain. According to the Financial Times the sticking point was with respect to languages that patents would be translated into, with Span and to a lesser extent Italy being unhappy with the prominence of English, French and German.

On Tuesday, November 9, 2010, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit heard oral arguments in TiVo, Inc. v. EchoStar Corp. The case pits TiVo versus Dish, and any ruling from the Federal Circuit will necessarily define the extent to which a district court judge can rely on contempt proceedings to enforce an injunction rather than simply order a full blown new trial. In process the en banc oral argument in this case at the Federal Circuit did not substantially differ from the oral argument held at the Supreme Court the day earlier in the Costco copyright case, where the Supreme Court was struggling with the meaning of the phrase “lawfully made under this Title.” There are two phrases that will be at the center of resolving the TiVo case. The first is “fair ground of doubt,” and the second is “merely colorably different.”

Currently, the average time between the approval of a green technology petition and the first action on an application is just 49 days. In several cases, patent applications in the green technology program have been issued within a year of the filing date. Earlier patenting of these technologies can help inventors to secure funding, create businesses, and bring vital green technologies to market much sooner. In fact, since the pilot program began in December 2009, a total of 790 petitions have been granted to green technology patent applicants, with 94 patents having already been issued.

On Thursday, November 4, 2010, I attended the 15th Annual Inventors Conference at the USPTO.  In my article Reporting from the 15th Annual USPTO Inventors Conference I discussed the morning sessions and lunch speaker, for day one of the conference.  After lunch, and a panel discussion of the morning speakers, the attendees of the conference went into two sets of…

In a peculiar oddity those who choose to challenge the final determinations on patentability of the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (BPAI) can elect to either proceed directly to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, or they can elect to proceed to the United States Federal District Court for the District of Columbia. The question presented and considered by the full Court at the Federal Circuit was whether new evidence (i.e., evidence not previously presented to the USPTO) can be presented to the District Court when challenging a decision of the BPAI. The short answer — YES. However, without new evidence at the District Court the Federal Circuit must continue to give deference to the USPTO on further appeal.

The dispute arose because Omega, S.A., sought to prevent the petitioner, Costco Wholesale Corporation, from reselling genuine watches originally sold by Omega to authorized foreign distributors. Omega, a Swiss company that manufactures watches in Switzerland, did not authorize the importation of the watches by Costco, despite the fact that Costco legally purchased the watches abroad. Thus, the question in this case will be whether copyrighted materials made abroad and legally purchased abroad can be imported without the express permission of the copyright owner. In other words, does the first sale doctrine extinguish the rights of the copyright holder when the goods are made abroad and sold abroad.

Similarly, inventors shouldn’t be rushing out to write their own patent applications and represent themselves pro se. In fact, representing yourself in a patent application is the patent equivalent of taking out your own appendix — a REALLY bad idea. Having said that, many inventors are faced with the situation where they simply cannot afford to hire anyone to assist them. It is either go it alone or do nothing at all. In that situation the inventor is faced with a terrible dilemma. If the inventor goes into the situation understanding they are not going to get the breadth, depth and scope of rights they otherwise could get, and that is acceptable, then they have made a knowing business decision. The Libertarian in me believes that we shouldn’t say don’t do it, but the Patent Attorney in me knows that we need to be realistic about the chances of success and provide that information in a realistic way without sugar coating the reality.

While Tea Partiers generally oppose federal government intervention, a U.S. judge has agreed to referee a dispute among Florida political activists that questions whether anyone has a trademark or any other intellectual property rights to the “Tea Party” name. Given their anti-establishment fervor, one might also be surprised to hear that a Tea Party group filed for federal registration of a trademark. But in April of this year, Marylynne Cellamare filed an application for TEA PARTY in the USPTO (serial number 85011226). The Examiner rejected the mark in an Office action a month later because the mark was merely descriptive. Ms. Cellamare has not responded. And there’s an application for TEA PARTY PATRIOTS (serial 77777712) that wasn’t flat out rejected, but the Examiner did require a disclaimer to “Tea Party”. The application is now before the TTAB in opposition proceedings. There are many more of these types of applications ranging from clothing to bumper stickers to political activism.