This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
We use many different strategies during patentprosecution. Many of our strategies reflect the startup-nature of our inventions, where we are constantly working on the product-market-fit. We may need several bites at the apple to effectively protect our invention.
For example, companies pursuing patent protection in both the US and the EU should keep in mind a few key differences between these two jurisdictions to avoid losing valuable IP rights. Inventorship in the US is a critical component of patent ownership. Inventorship. Practice tip.
The number of artificial intelligence (AI) patent applications received annually by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) grew from 30,000 in 2002 to more than 60,000 in 2018. Further, the USPTO has issued thousands of inventions that utilize AI.
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) today affirmed a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decision that upheld an examiners rejection of certain claims of a patent application for a cancer immunotherapy invention. The opinion was authored by Judge Lourie.
In both cases, the Government argued that the Court’s recent decisions have strayed from earlier precedent and have fostered uncertainty regarding the patent eligibility standards. In particular, the Government highlighted the then-pending certiorari petition in Athena Diagnostics, Inc. patent counseling and opinions; d.
On February 20, 2024, a Brazilian congress member, Antônio Luiz Rodrigues Mano Júnior (known as Júnior Mano), introduced a bill to amend the national IP Statute (Law #9,279/96) and regulate the ownership of inventions generated by artificial intelligence systems.
The demographic data were collected voluntarily in 2021from the 21 regional programs that administer the PPBP as part of the broader goal of diversifying the patent system. patents are women, while a Harvard study said that white individuals are three times more likely to invent than Black individuals.
The Controller of Patents where it rebuked the Plaintiff for not filing written submissions in time and thereby delaying the patent application process. She highlights how the decision reiterates the importance of adhering to procedural tenets during patentprosecutions. Future Bath Products Private Ltd.
Patent and Trademark Office’s (USPTO) recent Request for Comments (RFC) on the impact of artificial intelligence (AI) highlights a critical juncture in intellectual property law—evaluating the impact of generative AI (GenAI) on the non-obviousness standard.
Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) Director Kathi Vidal today designated as precedential a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decision from March of this year that held a precedential U.S.
An unorganized capacity to respond to such rejection challenges often leaves the practitioner with very little alternative but to amend claims in a manner that narrows protection to less than what the applicant’s invention should have received.
Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) today published a final rule announcing across-the-board fee increases of 7.5% but scrapping the most controversial proposals from its April 2024 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM). The changes will take effect as of January 19, 2025.
The ratio set by them are so diverse that, in an adversarial proceeding such as patentprosecution or litigation, the opposite parties may pick their respective chosen or desired positions based on any of them, and no clear conclusion could be arrived at.
Yet, an enigmatic question looms large: would the powers that be genuinely consider patenting such advanced technology, fully aware that patent applications might see the light of day? various three-letter and four-letter government agencies), ensuring certain innovations remain confidential. defense departments (e.g.,
Yet, an enigmatic question looms large: would the powers that be genuinely consider patenting such advanced technology, fully aware that patent applications might see the light of day? various three-letter and four-letter government agencies), ensuring certain innovations remain confidential. defense departments (e.g.,
Yet, an enigmatic question looms large: would the powers that be genuinely consider patenting such advanced technology, fully aware that patent applications might see the light of day? various three-letter and four-letter government agencies), ensuring certain innovations remain confidential. defense departments (e.g.,
Amendments are, therefore, common and to be expected in the normal course of patentprosecution. What is at stake is the scope of the claims that will ultimately end up in the utility patent you’re hoping to obtain. Think of the patent process as a negotiation with the US government.
And Does it Apply to Stakeholders of a Patent Lifecycle. Patents are composed of several different parts, each of which serves a particular purpose in securing the rights of an invention. Each component can provide information to the various stakeholders in the life of a patent.
In the case of Stephen Thaler’s attempt to obtain patent protection for a food container and light stick he says were independently invented by his AI machine, DABUS, the inventor-in-fact will be either Thaler or his machine. The procedural posture of Thaler v.
The Vidya Drolia case laid down certain conditions for non-arbitrability of disputes and stated that grant and issue of patents and registration of trademarks were exclusive sovereign or government functions, thus making them non-arbitrable. This patent protection was challenged by La Renon before the IPAB under section 64.
selected address issues such as SPC protection for combination products, double patenting, prosecution history estoppel and the influence of declarations made by the patentee in parallel proceedings, the possibility for national courts to request technical opinions from the EPO under Art. The decisions we (arbitrarily!)
That is to say, ‘applicants’ are interested stakeholders here, and focusing on issues faced by applicants alone, just one of the many stakeholders, does not equate to understanding the patent oppositions mechanism as a whole. … The right to oppose the grant of a patent is just as sacrosanct as the right to seek grant of a patent.
In this post, developed along the lines of a literature review cum blogpost, Yashna Walia has looked through the various government policy documents on AI to see what they have to say about IP! However, he also stated that the government was not considering bringing a law or regulating the growth of artificial intelligence in the country.
The goal was to provide better access to the patent system for a number of potential participants, such as individual inventors, small businesses, and underrepresented innovators. government’s spending package, the Consolidated Appropriations Act , for 2023. had a gross income.
During IPWatchdog’s LIVE event in Dallas, Texas, in September, USPTO Texas Regional Office Director Hope Shimabuku explained that issuing “robust and reliable patents”—which seems to have replaced the oft-maligned term, “patent quality,”—is a key focus for USPTO Director Kathi Vidal.
Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) today announced the findings of two reports conducted by third-party academic economists and submitted to Congress late last year, as required by the Unleashing American Innovators Act of 2022 (UAIA).
Upon recognizing the cruciality of MSMEs for the Indian economy, the Government of India has introduced several schemes and programs that are specifically targeted to encourage MSMEs. This may include novel inventions, an MSME’s brand name, or an industrial design.
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT SCHEMES AND PROGRAMMES. The central government brought a Scheme for Facilitating Start-Ups Intellectual Property Protection (SIPP) with a vision to protect and promote intellectual property rights of start-ups and thus encourage innovation and creativity among them. Intellectual Property Facilitation Centre (NRDC).
PatentProsecution. Patent protection is generally available for cannabis and cannabis-related innovations on the same basis as any other innovation, presenting relatively few obstacles for applicants. A patent applicant’s planned use of the claimed invention thus has no bearing on its patentability.
His research focuses on intellectual property rights in relation to health systems, sustainable development and innovation, pharmaceutical patents, knowledge governance, and technology and law. Transferring this burden to the Controller would shift a private obligation of the patentee to the government as a public duty.
Delhi High Court Comes Down Heavily on the Patent Office for Delay in Passing the Order Image by Freepik DHC comes down on the Patent Office for a four-year delay in issuing an order. Read this post by SpicyIP intern Jyotpreet on what this means for the delays in patentprosecution timelines. 1 ayurvedic paste”.
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) yesterday republished its Request for Comments (RFC) on the establishment of an additional USPTO Regional Office in the southeast region and four new community outreach offices.
During the Patent Public Advisory Committee (PPAC) quarterly meeting held today, participants provided an update on the Director Review process under the Supreme Court’s Arthrex v. Smith and Nephew ruling, among other announcements.
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) yesterday republished its Request for Comments (RFC) on the establishment of an additional USPTO Regional Office in the southeast region and four new community outreach offices.
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) yesterday republished its Request for Comments (RFC) on the establishment of an additional USPTO Regional Office in the southeast region and four new community outreach offices.
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) yesterday republished its Request for Comments (RFC) on the establishment of an additional USPTO Regional Office in the southeast region and four new community outreach offices.
Patentprosecution, portfolio, and strategic patenting considerations. Patents have contributed significantly to the advances in science and technology that make lithium-ion batteries more affordable and efficient today. Additionally, one should ask questions such as: where are the customers located?
In my view, the proposed fee increases for continuation applications, RCEs, and excess claims suggest the USPTO is using financial incentives to shape applicant behavior and encourage more compact and focused patentprosecution. This aims to deter competition barriers from multiple patents on obvious variants of an invention.
But as more players enter the market and obtain patent protection for their innovations, IP disputes among competitors are heating up. Global patent wars, safety concerns among the public, and scrutiny from government regulators are challenges that the battery industry must face head-on as it heads toward powering the future.
Furthering the President’s objective that we take a ‘whole-of-government’ approach to competition policy, a number of agencies are involved in both the Council and the working groups. As part of Commerce’s effort to allow all Americans to participate in our economy, USPTO is making the Council for Inclusive Innovation (CI²) a top priority.
It was styled as an open letter to Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, the incoming co-leaders of the soon-to-be Department of Government Efficiency. In that article John explains that the patent system is currently foundered, but that it can be fixed with focus and ongoing commitment to see the fixes through to results.
Lava gave a mammoth 476 page judgement while dealing with issues related to novelty, inventive step, Section 3(k) and FRAND. He concluded that the impugned order is aligned with the government’s scientific goals and food security concerns. Also, the knowledge of the PSITA will be limited to the field of invention in question.
The Controller of Patents and Designs, Kartikeya Srivastava, discusses interpretation of biological processes under Section 3(j). Having freelanced as a patent research analyst, he developed an interest in patentprosecution and in exploring the Patents Act through various interpretative approaches.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 9,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content