Posts Tagged: "patent"

By keeping an eye on stealth and dangerous patents managing the future risk presented is much easier. By proactively monitoring the landscape of published applications and granted patents you may be able to engage in design work-arounds to avoid the most dangerous patents. You may also be able to actively identify patents and pending patent application that are ripe for licensing or acquisition at an early stage, perhaps before the patent even issues or before the patent works its way into the hands of a litigious patent owner. Even if you cannot acquire rights through licensing or acquire all dangerous patents, if you have a meaningful patent footprint that gives you the right to do a variety of things you may well be able to defend based upon having broad based rights to engage in what it is that you are accused of doing.

A team of law students, who are members of the Intellectual Property Law Fellowship at the Thomas Jefferson School of Law in San Diego, California, are working on a Research Project directed toward aiding patent practitioners in developing international patent filing strategies for biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies. The team is working to amass statistically significant survey data on the countries…

These innovative technologies bring new economic opportunities. According to a recent GAO report, many experts in industry, government, and academia anticipate that nanotech innovations could match or exceed the economic and societal impacts of the digital revolution. The nanomedicine market, which has been estimated at about 20 percent to about 40 percent of the overall nanotechnology market, was valued at 78.54 billion USD in 2012 and is expected to grow to 117.60 billion USD by 2019… the U.S. maintains its dominance observed in previous years with about 54 percent of the nanotechnology patent literature published in 2013 being assigned to U.S.-based entities, followed by South Korea at 8.3 percent, Japan at 8.0 percent, and Germany at 5.8 percent.

The U.S. Department of Commerce’s United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) today announced that it will host a public forum to discuss the first-inventor-to-file (FITF) provisions of the America Invents Act (AIA). The forum marks the first anniversary of the implementation of FITF, and will be held on March 17, 2014, at the USPTO headquarters in Alexandria, Virginia. Deputy Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and USPTO Deputy Director Michelle Lee, along with experts from the offices of the Deputy Commissioner for Patent Examination Policy and the Deputy Commissioner for Patent Operations, will participate in the event.

It is almost incomprehensible that the Patent Office would put together a litigation resource that ignores the reality that many companies, both large and small, trample on the rights of innovators who have spent large amounts of time, money and energy receive a patent and disclosing their innovation to the world. . . the Patent Office only offers a one-sided help section that gives advice to infringers and sets a tone that comes across as anti-patent and anti-patent owner. This strikes me as fundamentally misguided and clearly demonstrates the anti-patent bias of the Obama Administration. . . I would expect the federal government — the Patent Office that is charged with an important Constitutional duty — to be even handed and empathetic to innovators and patent owners as well.

The Court will hear oral argument as follows: on February 26, in two cases on granting (Octane Fitness) and reviewing (Highmark) attorneys’ fee awards; on March 31, in a case (Alice Corp.) on patent eligibility of system and computer-implemented method claims; on April 21, in a case (POM Wonderful) on claims under Section 43 of the Lanham Act challenging labels regulated by the Food and Drug Administration; on April 22, in a case (Aereo) on whether a provider of broadcast television programming over the Internet violates a copyright owner’s public performance right; on April 28, in a case (Nautilus) on the proper standard for finding indefiniteness invalidity for patents; and on April 30, in a case (Limelight) on joint liability for method claim infringement where all of the claimed steps are performed but not by a single entity.

Also rising at an alarming rate are the number of infringement assertions, which can often take the form of a threatening letter that goes over the top and even crosses the line into open misrepresentation… There is no more alarming moment for an accused infringer than the moment the demand letter arrives. While large entities are sued frequently and it is part of doing business in America, a small business receiving a demand letter that alleges patent infringement may be the first time it has faced this reality. An understandable initial reaction is to get in touch with the party sending the demand letter and just explain that you are not infringing. However, if you have been sued by a company legitimately characterized as a patent troll, a lack of infringement may be of no consequence, as the patent troll may continue to require a choice between a license and a more-costly lawsuit defense.

We start today with a look at our featured patent application, which describes a method of constructing contact lenses with inversion markings. These markings will let a user know that a contact lens is improperly inverted before inserting one into an eye, avoiding unnecessary irritation. Other contact lens technologies, including a lens containing an electronic circuit for visual enhancement, are described in other patent applications that we noticed today. Johnson & Johnson has a fairly wide patent portfolio comprising many consumer products and professional devices for medical fields. This is evidenced by a few recently issued patents, one of which protects a system of analyzing patient health through fluorescent lighting applications. A soap bar with better cleansing properties, and a ophthalmologic solution container that prevents contamination, are protected by other patents that our readers may find interesting.

Currently the President is under fire for Executive Actions, which is something that he railed against when he was Presidential Candidate Obama in 2008, but increasingly embraces. The criticism of the President with respect to Executive Action has heretofore been related to the fact that through executive fiat the President has single handedly re-written laws passed by Congress… No such re-writing of law seems to be implicated in the Executive Actions announced today relative to the patent system. In fact, the Executive Actions on the patent front are largely much ado about nothing and seem most intended to grab headlines. Still, there are a few items that make perfect sense, such as the USPTO working with industry to train patent examiners on cutting edge scientific developments and an expansion of the pro bono program. Still, other initiatives claim to address patent quality but I can’t for the life of me understand how that could be possible. How accurate ownership records kept after the issuance of a patent will help patent quality is a mystery to me, and unexplained by the White House.

Stanford sets aside an annual research budget of about $1.35 billion to fund its development operations for 2013-2014, and since the 1930s the university has been the starting grounds for nearly 40,000 companies, creating about 5.4 million jobs total. A 2012 study conducted by Stanford estimated that companies formed by Stanford entrepreneurs generate world revenues of $2.7 trillion annually. Recent Stanford research projects have included new techniques for the successful removal of stomach cancer cells, as well as biological surveys of marine life showing how crude oil leaks can affect heart health in fish. Today, we’re looking at the recent publications released from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office assigned directly to Stanford University to take a snapshot look at the innovative side of this academic institution.

Our featured patent application today features an artificial knee device that surpasses the range of motion available through previous passive devices or surgical implants. The variable motion of the mechanical knee joint found in this patent application would grant an implant patient a much greater degree of motion throughout their daily lives. Other patent applications that we decided to look at more closely include a vehicle engine designed for more efficient methanol consumption as well as more energy-efficient incandescent lighting devices. We also profile a series of patents recently issued to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology to protect an array of technologies, most of them dealing with better designed computer user interfaces for various jobs. One system includes a collapsible stylus device that can enable better 3D image editing performance. Another system would control a novel style of vending machine that dispenses entertainment and information along with food and beverages. We also were piqued by a technology developed with a partner institution in Saudi Arabia for better desalination methods to create drinkable water.

We’ve found an intriguing assortment of innovations in medical and industrial fields, and even the video game industry, coming out of these academic institutions. The featured patent application for today’s column would protect a system of better capturing video game player motion for physical activities required of games. This system would make it harder for users to cheat these games and complete tasks without completing the physical motion the game asks users to perform. Other patent applications we discovered include better systems of creating useful stem cells and a more effective topical formula for acne treatment.