31 October

Sticky

Practical Tips for Drafting Patent Applications After American Axle & Manufacturing Inc. v. Neapco Holdings

in Blog

The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decided on October 3 to affirm the ruling by the United States District Court for the District of Delaware that the asserted claims of U.S. patent number 7,774,911 are directed to patent ineligible subject matter under Section 101 (American Axle & Manufacturing Inc. v. Neapco Holdings LLC ). Much has been written about the majority and dissenting opinions. Here, we concentrate on what the patent practitioner can do when drafting a patent application in light of the case. Explain How One of the findings is that the specification discussed types of attenuation in propshafts, and tuning of...

31 October

0 Comments

Sticky

The Latest and Greatest Halloween Patents for Your Perusal

Posted by coffylawpro

in Blog

It’s a fun yet creepy day, so a fun and creepy patents post is in order. Hopefully you are reading this while dressed as a goblin, ghoul, or your favorite/ most hated politician. While I must admit that the USPTO database exhibited a dearth of Halloween-related patents this year, below are the few newer additions, along with some of the classics. Happy Halloween everyone! Halloween bag with pop-up surpriseUS Patent No. 10,364,068Issued July 30, 2019 This patent is described as follows: “A pop-up mechanism for use with a bag so that when operated by a user, a decorative object pops up from a...

31 October

0 Comments

Sticky

Panelists Warn Senate IP Subcommittee Against Drastic Measures on Patent Quality

Posted by coffylawpro

in Blog

The Senate Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Intellectual Property, headed by Senator Thom Tillis (R-NC), yesterday heard from five witnesses on ways to improve patent quality at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). Suggestions ranged from fixing patent eligibility jurisprudence to strengthening efforts on international work sharing, increasing patent application fees, and allotting more time for the examination process. The majority of panelists warned against the dangers of using patent quality as a means to simply block broad swaths of patents that particular industries or entities don’t like, and emphasized that clarifying U.S. patent law would likely go a long way to...

31 October

0 Comments

Sticky

Federal Circuit Says PTAB Judges Are Not Constitutionally Appointed

Posted by coffylawpro

in Blog

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, in an opinion authored by Judge Moore, has ruled that the current statutory scheme for appointing Administrative Patent Judges (APJs) to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) violates the Appointments Clause of the U.S. Constitution as it makes APJs principal officers. APJs are presently appointed by the Secretary of Commerce, but principal officers must be appointed by the U.S. President under the Constitution, Article II, § 2, cl. 2. To remedy this, the statutory removal provisions that are presently applied to APJs must be severed so that the Secretary of Commerce has the...

30 October

0 Comments

Sticky

The PPH Program at the USPTO: Favorable Stats Don’t Alleviate Big Risks

Posted by coffylawpro

in Blog

Since 2006, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has participated in the Patent Prosecution Highway Pilot Program (the PPH Program). Generally, the program is designed to accelerate examination of a given patent application as a result of examination of a corresponding application at another PPH-participating patent office having reached a positive ruling more quickly. If an application is eligible for and accepted into the PPH Program, the USPTO expedites processing of the application. Examiners also have the benefit of drawing from another examiner’s assessment of corresponding claims. Generally, existing data on the PPH Program has indicated that it is associated...

30 October

0 Comments

Sticky

Keeping Up with Copyright Infringement: Copyright, Celebrities, Paparazzi, and Social Media

Posted by coffylawpro

in Blog

Just two months after the end of her second copyright infringement lawsuit, fashion model Jelena Noura “Gigi” Hadid was sued for a third time, on September 13, for copyright infringement for posting paparazzi photos to her social media accounts without the license or permission of the photographer. Other celebrities, including Jennifer Lopez, Victoria Beckham and, most recently, Justin Bieber, have made news for the same situation. This trend falls into an interesting intersection of two significant tenets of law: a celebrity’s right of publicity in their own image and a photographer’s right to copyright their artistic work. Hadid Cases Hadid was first...

29 October

0 Comments

Sticky

How Businesses Can Prepare for ITC Exclusion Orders: Section 337 Investigations on the Rise

Posted by coffylawpro

in Blog

Patent investigations at the International Trade Commission (ITC) have been on an upward trend in the last few years. In 2018, the most recent year with complete data, 74 new complaints were filed and there were 130 active investigations, compared to the 117 active investigations in 2017. The trend appears to be continuing in 2019. In today’s global economy, with so many types of products and components being imported into the United States, a rise in patent investigations means that a large number of U.S. companies and their customers are at risk of having their supply chain disrupted. This can result in...

29 October

0 Comments

Sticky

Trading Technologies, ChargePoint Ask High Court for Help with Federal Circuit’s Conflicted Approach to Patent Eligibility

Posted by coffylawpro

in Blog

This article was updated on October 30 to clarify certain facts of the case in the opening paragraph. Trading Technologies International, Inc. (TT) has filed a second petition with the U.S. Supreme Court asking it to review a Federal Circuit holding that computer-implemented inventions that do not improve the basic functions of the computer itself are directed to abstract ideas and therefore patent ineligible. The present petition relates to U.S. Patent Nos. 7,685,055 (the “’055 patent”); 7,693,768 (the “’768 patent”); and 7,725,382 (the “’382 patent”). The ‘768 and ‘382 patents are continuations from, share the same specification as, and have claims that closely track the claims of U.S. Patent No. 6,766,304 and U.S. Patent...

29 October

0 Comments

Sticky

To Truly Help the USPTO, Congress Must First Stabilize Patent Law

Posted by coffylawpro

in Blog

The United States patent system originated out of the Constitution and has been the world leader since its creation in 1790. Thomas Jefferson reviewed the first patent applications for several years until he quickly realized that the increasing demand of reviewing applications exceeded his abilities. For the next 43 years, patents were granted without any critical examination and left to the courts to determine their validity. The difficult job of examining patent applications began in 1836. The process of evaluating a patent application, studying already known information called prior art and making a judgment of patentability remains essentially the same to...

24 October

0 Comments

Sticky

A Response to Claims of Patent Propaganda and a Plea for Interpretive Charity in IP Debate

Posted by coffylawpro

in Blog

The Claim We are Anti-Patent is Patently False Appreciating that Ms. Malone characterizes her piece as “one view” of the above-referenced panel, I wish to offer another, hopefully more complete view of last week’s discussion. For example, one feature of Tuesday’s panel is the panel’s discussion of how high-quality patents are an important, valuable, and in some cases necessary element of the innovation ecosystem. I respectfully disagree with Ms. Malone’s assertion that the panel “concluded that we should abolish patents and begin centrally planning the subsidization of research and development for all innovation, all in the interests of their ‘free market.’” Why...

October 2019