Posts in Government

Senator Thom Tillis: If IP Stakeholders Can’t Find Consensus, Congress Can’t Help

Senator Thom Tillis (R-NC) arguably has more pressing issues to focus on than intellectual property at the moment, as the nation scrambles to find solutions to the many economic and health crises caused by the coronavirus pandemic and COVID-19. And yet, Tillis has somehow managed to remain focused on IP, with recent movement in the areas of copyright and trademark modernization, as well as exploration into the implications of Allen et al. v. Cooper, Governor of North Carolina, et al. I recently had the opportunity to catch up with Senator Tillis on the record, discussing his interest in intellectual property, the status of patent eligibility reform, the COVID-19 outbreak, copyright modernization, trademark modernization and the harm done by counterfeiting. Without further ado, here is my conversation with Senator Thom Tillis, Chairman of the Senate IP Subcommittee.

Booking.com Oral Arguments: Will Justices’ Skepticism of USPTO Arguments Trump Monopoly Concerns?

The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in United States Patent and Trademark Office, et al., v. Booking.com B.V., (Case No. 19-46) yesterday, in the High Court’s first ever telephonic hearing. The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) urged the Supreme Court to reverse a judgment of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit that held BOOKING.COM to be a registrable trademark. The Respondent, Booking.com, argued that the primary significance test, rather than the Federal Circuit’s precedent in Goodyear Co. v. Goodyear Rubber Co., holds the answer to the question of how to distinguish between descriptive and generic names, and under the primary significance test, BOOKING.COM is a registerable trademark.

This Week in Washington IP: Developing COVID-19 Tests, China’s Global Tech Dominance and GPS Spectrum Concerns

This week in Washington, D.C., while the nation continues to deal with the fallout of the COVID-19 pandemic, some Senate committee hearings on the Federal Communications Commission’s Ligado Networks 5G decision and funding COVID-19 testing innovation have been scheduled with social distancing guidelines in place. Tech and IP-related webinars continue to be scheduled by think tanks and Brookings Institution features a couple of online events this week, one exploring developments in telehealth, another looking at China’s technological growth and aspirations of global tech dominance. 

USPTO Shoots Down DABUS’ Bid For Inventorship

Last week, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued a decision refusing to vacate a Notice of Missing Parts in U.S. Patent Application No.: 16/524,350 (the ‘350 Application), titled “Devices and Methods for Attracting Enhanced Attention”, for failure to “identify each inventor by his or her legal name” on the Application Data Sheet (ADS). The ADS listed a single inventor with the given name DABUS and the family name as “Invention generated by artificial intelligence.” DABUS stands for “Device for the Autonomous Bootstrapping of Unified Sentience”. The Application listed Stephen L. Thaler as the Assignee, Applicant and the Legal Representative. The USPTO denied the petition to vacate the Notice of Missing Parts.

PTAB Establishes Two-Part Framework for Denying Institution of IPRs Based on Previously Presented Art Or Argument

Earlier this year, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) established a two-part framework for applying 35 U.S.C. § 325(d), under which the PTAB may deny institution of an inter partes review (IPR) if substantially the same art or arguments previously were presented to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). This framework injects a degree of rigor into the PTAB’s discretionary Section 325(d) determinations and suggests ways that IPR participants may more effectively raise or resist Section 325(d) arguments. The framework and its practical implications are discussed below.

USTR Special 301 Report and Review of Notorious Markets Highlight Continued Concerns with China

On April 29, the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) released its 2020 Special 301 Report on Intellectual Property Protection and its 2019 Review of Notorious Markets for Counterfeiting and Piracy. The Report identifies countries and IP-related market access barriers and steps necessary to address those barriers. Section I of the Report highlights “Developments in Intellectual Property Rights Protection, Enforcement, and Related Market Access” and Section II is a Priority Watch List including country reports for countries where particular problems exist with respect to IP protection, enforcement, or market access. The Review identifies illustrative examples of online and physical markets that are alleged to have contributed to substantial trademark counterfeiting and copyright piracy activities around the world.