![[IPWatchdog Logo]](https://ipwatchdog.com/wp-content/themes/IPWatchdog%20-%202023/assets/images/temp/logo-small@2x.png){kind=logo}
Mark Marrello
Partner
Imperium Patent Works, LLP
Mark Marrello is a partner at Imperium Patent Works, LLP. While earning his M.S. and B.S. in Electrical Engineering, Mark worked at Qualcomm Incorporated as a Senior Radio Frequency Integrated Circuit Engineer. Mark’s responsibilities included the design, test, and production ramp up of cutting edge multi-mode and multi-band communication devices. After attaining his M.S. in Electrical Engineering, Mark transitioned to Qualcomm’s in-house legal department and began attending law school in the evening. Upon attaining his J.D., Mark became the second attorney at Bridgelux Incorporated where he singularly managed all intellectual property matters including building a broad patent and trademark portfolio, managing litigation issues, negotiating licensing agreements, drafting business and employee contracts, and advising the executive team on a variety of strategic initiatives. Mark is admitted to practice before the United States Patent & Trademark Office, all California State Courts, and the United States District Courts for the Northern and Southern Districts of California.
Recent Articles by Mark Marrello
A Plea to Director Squires: Close the Loopholes in Your Proposed New Rules for Serial Patent Challenges
I would like to thank U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) Director John Squires for his initiative to stop serial patent challenges at the USPTO. It is a disgrace that the USPTO and our laws allow such blatant harassment and abuse of process. Squires’ vision is absolutely correct that a patent challenger should have a SINGLE opportunity to challenge a patent in a SINGLE proceeding in a SINGLE venue (a court or the USPTO/Patent Trial and Appeal Board [PTAB], but not both).
Urge Congress to Keep the Established and Efficiently Working Sections 100 and 112 of the U.S. Patent Act
Now that the Senate Subcommittee on Intellectual Property has concluded its hearings on patent eligibility reform, it appears that the draft changes to Sections 100 and 112 are the last great danger in the overall patent eligibility debate and we must not let our guard down. A new version of the bill is due out sometime after the July 4 holiday; please send the following text with any of your edits to [email protected].
Urge the Drafters of the New Section 101 to Support Inventor-Friendly Reform
Senators and Representatives Coons, Tillis, Collins, Johnson, and Stivers recently announced in a press release a proposed framework to fix patent eligibility law in the United States. If written as proposed in the draft framework, section 101 may do harm to the patent system. The senators and representatives are now soliciting feedback on the draft framework. They are likely to take additional action on the framework as soon as early this week. Please send the following text with any of your edits to [email protected].
A Plea to All IP Stakeholders: Support Director Iancu’s Efforts to Restore the Value of U.S. Patents
USPTO Director Andrei Iancu’s 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance promises to virtually eliminate the greatest patent problem of our time. If implemented properly by the examiners and Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) judges, the guidance could solve the 101 mayhem and the incredible harm that it has done to inventors of computer implemented inventions. The guidance will also increase the value of patents, since strategic infringers will not be able to use the PTAB as the killing ground for patents using subject matter eligibility. Director Iancu needs us to support him with positive public comments as justification for his guidance and, very importantly, to suggest improvements to his guidance for its final/future version(s) and its implementation. Please send the following text with any of your edits to [email protected] by the March 8, 2019 deadline.