Information Filled Under 'uspto' Category
NEW YORK PARALEGAL BLOG: USPTO Eliminates Patent Prosecution … Friday, May 21st, 2010
Washington—The Department of Commerce’s United States Patent and Trademark Office ( USPTO ) today announced it would eliminate the fee for the petition to participate in Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) programs.
Read more from the original source:
NEW YORK PARALEGAL BLOG: USPTO Eliminates Patent Prosecution …
The USPTO offers an interesting deal to applicants with more than one application: give one application up in exchange for expedited examination of another application. This program has been available for a while, but the USPTO …
See the original post:
The IPKat – Passionate about Intellectual Property: USPTO: give …
In its own release, the American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) stated that it “opposes granting the USPTO fee-setting authority without ending the problem of fee diversion.” According to the AIPLA press release, …
Follow this link:
IPBiz: USPTO fee-setting authority without ending fee diversion …
By Donald Zuhn — The US Patent and Trademark Office announced today that it is providing a new contingency option for its electronic filing system (EFS-Web) for use when the primary portal to the EFS-Web has an unscheduled outage.
See the original post here:
Patent Docs: USPTO Provides Contingency Option for EFS-Web
By Donald Zuhn — In the face of strong opposition, the House of Representatives declined to bring a bill that would provide the US Patent and Trademark Office with fee-setting authority to the floor for a vote during today’s …
View original post here:
Patent Docs: New USPTO Fee-Setting Bill Introduced in House
Per this press release yesterday at the USPTO: USPTO Opens Application Exchange Program to All Applicants to Reduce Patent Backlog “Project Exchange” Expanded and Extended to Enable All Applicants to Expedite Processing of a Pending Application in Exchange for Withdrawal of an Unexamined Pending Application WASHINGTON – The Commerce Department’s United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) today announced the expansion to all applicants of its “Project Exchange” program. Under the expanded Project Exchange, which will take effect with the publication of the Federal Register notice in the coming weeks, any applicant with more than one application, filed prior to the inception of the program, currently pending at the USPTO can receive expedited review of one application in exchange for withdrawing an unexamined application.
Read the original post:
USPTO Opens Application Exchange Program to All Applicants.
Professor Colleen Chien (Santa Clara) has written an interesting new article on the importance of amicus briefs in patent cases. Her article is titled Patent Amicus Briefs: What the Courts’ Friends Can Teach Us About the Patent System and is available online at SSRN .
Read more:
Chien: Recent History Suggests that Supreme Court will Rule Bilski’s Claim Unpatentable
Initiative seeks to reduce backlog of patent applications by getting rid of those that are of marginal value. In exchange for abandoning an application another will be advanced out of order to the front of the examination queue.
More here:
USPTO Expands Application Exchange to Reduce Backlog | IPWatchdog …
This data shows that the written description doctrine is essential to the Office’s ability to perform its basic examination function. Now, Jim Singer concludes in his recent IP Spotlight post that this may be a signal that the USPTO …
Visit link:
Will USPTO use Section 112 more often in rejections of software …
The Federal Circuit recently granted Abbott’s request for an en banc rehearing of its Therasense decision.
Continue reading here:
Therasense: Background Documents For Those Preparing Amicus Filings
The following note was written by European Patent Attorney Paul Cole who is also the Visiting Professor of IP at Bournemouth University EPO Enlarged Appeal Board decision in G 0003/08 Programs for computers/PRESIDENT’S REFERENCE The EPO President asked the Enlarged Board to consider a set of questions concerning the patentability of programs for computers (computer-implemented inventions, CIIs) on which she deemed the Boards of Appeal to have given different decisions and which she held to be of fundamental importance within the meaning of a. 112(1) EPC. Her referral had been preceded by an informal letter from her predecessor, Alain Pompidou, dated 22 February 2007, in which Lord Justice Jacob’s suggestion in the
Menell: Patent Authority of the International Trade Commission Tuesday, May 11th, 2010Berkeley Law School professor Peter Menell has published a new essay in the Patently-O Patent Law Journal that discusses the Section 337 authority of the International Trade Commission (ITC). The ITC now conducts more full patent adjudications on an annual basis than any district court in the nation
More:
Menell: Patent Authority of the International Trade Commission
The main issue the USPTO wants to address is the frankly laughable backlog of patent applications – 750000 of them, to be exact. It currently takes 35 months from application to grant; the USPTO wants to reduce this to just 12 months
Read more here:
USPTO Plans Potentially Disastrous for Small Companies
There is an interesting article at Politico by Gary Locke, Secretary of Commerce, on the reasons that patent law reform should be enacted. Most notable, in our opinion, are the portions of the current reform bill that were emphasized by the Secretary for their importance.
Continued here:
Secretary of Commerce Gary Locke on Patent Law Reform.
The following essay was written by Secretary of Commerce Gary Locke and originally published in Politico . Locke is the former Governor of Washington and former partner at Davis Wright Tremaine.
Read the original post:
Gary Locke: Patent Office Needs Self-Control of Funding and Enhanced Post-Grant Review
Professor Mark Lemley has released a draft of his new study on patent forum shopping titled “Where to File Your Patent Case.” Professor Lemley suggests three primary factors that influence a patentees choice of forum: (1) likelihood of winning; (2) likelihood of getting to trial; and (3) speed of getting to trial. Professor Lemley used the Stanford IP Litigation Clearinghouse database to classify these factors for 25 most-active district courts. ( http://ssrn.com/abstract=1597919 ).
Read the rest here:
Patent Litigation Forum Shopping
Based on the USPTO’s most recent numbers on examination, I created an updated table of the average delay until a first office action is mailed from the PTO. These numbers reflect an average for each technology center as it operates today. The 3.25 year delay in Electronic Commerce (TC 3620) means that the applications receiving first office actions during the past three months had been pending for 3.25 years ago on average — taking us back to applications filed around new-years 2007
See the rest here:
How Long Do I Wait for a First Office Action
Indian civil society organizations have sent an open letter to President Obama, informing him of the USPTO’s and U.S. Embassy’s attempts in influencing the course of the debate on Indian patent law. This letter follows another letter sent by these civil society organizations to the Minister of Commerce, objecting to the GWU-CII seminars and which we have blogged about here
Go here to see the original:
Guest Post: An Appeal by Indian Civil Society to the U.S. President
The following table looks at the number of years-in-prosecution for utility patents issued on April 27, 2010. I divided the issued patents into four groups depending whether the patent claims priority to either a foreign application or a US non-provisional
Read more here:
Update on Patent Pendency
In January 2010, the Federal Circuit held that the Patent Office had been undercalculating the patent term adjustments (PTA) owed to patentees because of USPTO delays during prosecution. About 80% of issued patents receive some term adjustment. The Wyeth case did not directly impact the calculation of which cases receive an adjustment, rather the decision operates to lengthen the adjustment for those already eligible.
More:
The Impact of Wyeth on Patent Terms
Harari v. Hollmer , No. 09-1406 (April19, 2010) During an Interference proceeding, Harai was dismissed from the proceeding and the Board concluded that Harari’s claims were unpatentable for lack of written description due to an insufficient incorporation by reference statement
Read the original post:
Fed. Cir.: Incorporation By Reference Valid When Information is "Ascertainable" By the Examiner
In Ex party Rodriguez , the BPAI rejected a patent applicant’s means-plus-function (MPF) claims as indefinite for failing to provide any corresponding structures in the specification beyond a general purpose computer. That decision followed the Federal Circuit’s Aristocrat holding that “simply disclosing a computer as the structure designated to perform a particular function does not limit the scope of the claim to ‘the corresponding structure, material, or acts’ that perform the function, as required by section 112 paragraph 6.” A patent examiner recently wrote-in to identify the fact that the BPAI has recently remanded dozens of pending appeals in light of Rodriguez
Go here to read the rest:
BPAI Remanding Cases Involving Computer-Oriented Means-Plus-Function Claims
US News & World Report has released its updated rankings of intellectual property (IP) programs for 2011. The ranking is created by polling a subset of law professors who teach at least one intellectual property law course
Read the original post:
Ranking of Patent Law Programs for 2011: Perhaps Six Junk-Science Ratings Are Better Than One
The White House has announced the nomination of Edward (Ed) DuMont to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit to replace Chief Judge Paul Michel who will be retiring May 31, 2010. The Senate must confirm the nomination along with the still-pending nomination of Judge O’Malley
Read the rest here:
Edward DuMont Nominated to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Anascape v. Nintendo ( Fed
Are Appeals at the Federal Circuit a “Coin Flip”? Friday, April 9th, 2010Guest Post by Professor Ted Sichelman, University of San Diego School of Law A general patent counsel at a Fortune 500 company recently remarked, “[T]he Federal Circuit does a coin flip and reverses district court decisions left and right. You might as well just roll the dice.”[1] When I was in legal practice, many patent litigators echoed this sentiment. In a recent article , I collected data from the University of Houston's PatStats project , Professor David Schwartz's exhaustive study on claim construction appeals, internal studies by the Federal Circuit, and the Administrative Office of the Courts to test this seemingly widespread belief.
Read the rest here:
Are Appeals at the Federal Circuit a “Coin Flip”?
New York, NY (2010)—David Kappos, Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office ( USPTO ), will give a talk titled “Vision for the USPTO in the 21st Century: Ensuring …
View post:
USPTO Director David Kappos at NYLS Friday 3/26 1pm