Posts Tagged: "US Supreme Court"

Does the Federal Circuit Give Enough Deference?

The attorneys for 800 Adapt, Inc. have recently filed a Petition for a Writ of Certiorari review of 800 Adapt, Inc. v. Murex Sec. Ltd., 539 F.3d 1354 (Fed. Cir. 2008) claiming that the Federal Circuit does not provide enough deference to district courts on claim construction and they should. According to Stephen Milbrath and David Magana of Orlando based Allen…

Machine Might Not be Patentable Subject Matter

Last week I was in Arlington, Virginia, teaching the PLI Patent Bar Review Course, so I was a bit out of touch with what was happening in the patent world as I tried to help a number of would-be patent attorneys and agents get through the PLI immersion course. Like clockwork, during this time out of the office the United…

7 Patent Reform Suggestions for Congress

After being told that patent reform in 2008 was all but a done deal, once again nothing happened.  I am happy that patent reform died in 2008 because the reforms that were being proposed were largely bad ideas, and they would have done absolutely nothing to address the many real and substantial problems that are facing the US patent system…

Patent Wishes for the New Year

It is that time of the year when everyone makes their resolutions, most of which are sure to be broken almost immediately in most cases, particularly when the resolution deals with losing weight or exercising.  Not to be deterred, I have made both of those resolutions myself and I am cautiously optimistic about the likelihood that I will stay the course…

Groklaw Response: Computer Software is Not Math

It is impossible to argue that software code does not employ mathematical influences, because it does. Having said this, the fact that mathematical techniques are employed does not as a matter of fact mean that software is mathematical. Under the US patent laws you cannot receive a patent that covers a mathematical equation or a law of nature. You can certainly use mathematical equations and laws of nature as the building blocks to create something that is new and nonobvious that is patentable. So even if software used mathematical equations there would be no prohibition against the patenting of software under a true and correct reading of the US patent laws.

Obscure Patent: Carry-out food container

Carry-out food container US Patent No. 7,451,889 Issued November 18, 2008 Did you know that on Tuesday, November 18, 2008, a carry out food container was patented? I discussed this patent in a post last week titled Unequal Treatment at the US Patent Office, where I discussed the unfair and inequal treatment that seems to be plaguing the Patent Office.  After…

FTC Petitions Supreme Court Over Rambus

On Monday, November 24, 2008, the Federal Trade Commission filed a petition for certiorari with the United States Supreme Court (see also Appendix Vol 1 and Appendix Vol 2) seeking review of the April 22, 2008 decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia in Rambus Inc. v. Federal Trade Commission, which turned out to…

Unequal Treatment at the US Patent Office

Something is seriously wrong at the United States Patent & Trademark Office, and it is becoming increasingly difficult to believe anything other than that there is ongoing unequal treatment of inventors who file patent applications. In the United States everyone is supposed to enjoy the same rights and privileges, and this concept manifests itself in the ideal that everyone is…

A Blow to Software Patents

While the Federal Circuit has not said that software cannot be patented, what they did say substantially changes the law that has prevailed over the last 10 years and will render many software patents useless. Moving forward, you can protect software, but only by protecting the machine that the software operates on, which is the way patent attorneys used to be forced to write software patent applications many years ago. What it also means is that to have any chance at protecting software with a patent you will have to be willing to spend signficant amounts of money, because simply put there is no economical way to draft patents cost-effectively given the new Federal Circuit guidelines.

Obscure Patent: Inside Out Clothing

Garments having inside out appearance US Patent No. 7,350,242 Issued April 1, 2008 The issuance of this patent on April Fools Day shows that someone at the Patent Office has a sense of humor.  This patent also reminds me of one of my all-time favorite obscure patents – Disposable boxer shorts – which was patented also on April Fools Day, just 5 years earlier.   In…