I'd like to draw your attention to Dennis Crouch's latest posting on Patenly O, presenting an actual estimation of waiting times for a first USPTO Office Action .
I don't know if the statistics refer to all US Applications, i.e. including those filed as a PCT National Phase. As far as I know, Applications filed as a national phase of a PCT Application take longer than Applications originally submitted as a US Application.
Posted by: Ophir Tal in USPTO, software patent, Software, politics, Patents Opposition, Patents, Patently-O, Patentability, Patent Prosecution, Patent Legislation, patent, Internet Patent, intellectual property, cyberlaw, Court of Appeals of the Federal Circuit, COMPUTER CONTROLLED SOFTWARE INTEGRATED INVENTIONS, claims, CAFC, blogging on
Jul 22, 2008
Prof. John F. Duffy analyses at Patently-O the probable position of the USPTO towards software patents as presented in a series of cases. Specifically, patentable subject matter must result in a physical transformation of an article that is tied to a particular machine. A general purpose computer may probably not be regarded as a particular machine, and data structures and numbers (e.g. webpage rankings) may probably neither be regarded as articles nor as being physically transformed. Well – some news for the software industry.
The analysis is recommended as being not only thorough but also quite easy to read.
Posted by: Ophir Tal in USPTO, United States, prosecution, Patents Opposition, Patents, Patently-O, Patent search, Patent Prosecution, patent opposition, patent, oppositions, intellectual property, consultation, blogging on
Jul 08, 2008
A possibility for opposing pending patent applications in the US is presented by Dennis Crouch in his blog Patently-O under the title "poor-man's opposition proceedings ".
The US law does not allow opposing a patent application (in contrary e.g. to israeli procedures which are partly based on receiving third party's oppositions), however they do commit applicants to submit to the patent office any relevant subject matter.
So, the procedure comprises sending such subject matter to the applicant, thus making him obligated to disclose it to the patent office!
I like this
Starting from today, my colleague Amit Zuckerstein and I will summerize posts of IP blogs that we like. Today is January 11st summary, and it is short:
Patently-O:
1. A new Intellectual Property Symposium is coming up in April 15-16 in San Jose with EETimes as the main sponsor. The price is $1,795 but Patently-O readers get $100 discount.
2. A new patent toolbar is available
.jpg)
.jpg)
