Tag >> US
In the In Re Bilski case, the US Court of Appeal for the Federal Circuit has made a decision about what it takes for a process claim to be patentable. On October 30, 2008, the United States Court of Appeal for the Federal Circuit has made a much anticipated decision in a case concerning a business method patent, the so-called In Re Bilski case. The decision is expected to be of vital importance to the validity of process claims in general, but especially to software/computer-implemented processes and business methods. Concurrently with the fact that the decision tightens up the conditions for getting approved typically software patents and business method patents, at any rate it also verifies that it is possible to patent that kind of things at all. The decision discusses what it takes
Posted by: Zeev Fisher in USPTO, US, JPO, Japan on
Oct 04, 2008
USPTO PRESS RELEASE: Washington, D.C. -On September 24, 2008, Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) Jon Dudas met with Commissioner of the Japan Patent Office (JPO) Takashi Suzuki in Geneva, Switzerland. They discussed how the USPTO and the JPO can further promote the existing close relationship between the two offices. They agreed that the expeditious protection of intellectual property rights including patents is critical to fostering technological innovation and accelerating economic development. At the conclusion of their meeting, Commissioner Suzuki and Under Secretary Dudas signed a statement focusing on enhanced mutual cooperation. The JPO and the USPTO have already been cooperating closely to
Posted by: Michael Kondoudis in USPTO, US on
Sep 22, 2008
For those who are still filing by paper, the USPTO announced last week that it will finally be doing away with the requirement for duplicate copies of forms required for processing fees (e.g., an authorization to charge a deposit account). Before Image File Wrappers (IFWs), when paper filing was an Applicant's only option, duplicate copies of fee processing forms were required because the USPTO processed fees separately from the paper application file. Today, however, these forms are scanned into an IFW so that they are viewable throughout the USPTO, even when these forms are submitted by paper. Even in those few applications in which duplicate copies would still be necessary for processing a fee (e.g., national security applications), the USPTO will make any necessary copies required
Posted by: Michael Kondoudis in USPTO, US on
Aug 25, 2008
The United States Congress has been debating whether to amend the patent laws currently in Title 35 of the United States Code. If respective patent reform bills pass the House and the Senate, this would represent the first comprehensive patent law reform by Congress since the Patent Act of 1952.
The Senate Bill has been shelved for this session but will likely be reintroduced next year. The House Bill, however, has passed, mirrors the Senate Bill, and includes the following major changes to current U.S. Patent Law and practice:
1. A switch from a first-to-invent system to a first-to-file system. The current U.S. "first to invent" system would be replaced with a "first to file" system.
2. A mechanism for third parties to submit art directly to Examiners. Under current U.S. practice, the
Innocent infringement of Copyrights reduces damages for the Infringer: US Court reduced damages for infringement of copyrights by downloading of music over the notorious KaZaA , to a good 200$ per downloaded infringed song (the 750$-30,000$ per song normally allowed under the Copyright Act) in the case of Whitney Harper a sixteen year old of innocence. The Judge has claimed that since the infringement was "an innocent infringement" the damage per each infringed song track downloaded is significantly reduced. To read more about it you can enter this
In August 2007 the USPTO has issued revisions to some of its rules that allow the PTO to implements limits in continuation applications and claims number. The Plaintiffs (Tafas) brought suit against the PTO and challenged the validity of the revised rules. On April 2008, the District Court has finally issued its Summary Judgment in the case in favor of the Plaintiffs stating that the PTO has stepped out of its authorities. In its appeal to the CAFC, the USPTO asked the Federal Circuit to answer the following points: - 1. Whether the USPTO's revised rules are within the PTO's statutory rulemaking authority;
- 2. Whether the revised rules stand in conflict with the Patent Act; and
- 3. Whether the PTO must provide public notice and comment for its rule revisions.
We shall surely continue
The American Inventors Protection Act of 1999 ("the AIPA") authorizes the extension of the term of a U.S. patent when the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office USPTO fails to take certain actions within specified timeframes. Specifically, the AIPA guarantees that:
1. the USPTO will initially act on an application within 14 months of its filing date or the date on which an international application fulfilled the requirements to enter the national stage;
2. the USPTO will respond to a reply or appeal within 4 months from the date that a reply or appeal is filed;
3. the USPTO will act on the application within 4 months after a decision from the PTO Board of Appeals or Federal Court, where at least one allowable claim remains in the application;
4. that the USPTO will issue a patent within 4 months of
Microsoft appealed an earlier jury verdict dated last April, maintaining that Microsoft has infringed a number of Alcatel-Lucent's patents. On Appeal, Judge Marilyn L. Huff refused to reconsider the April jury verdict and ordered Microsoft to pay for additional damages.
Ranbaxy Laboratories, an India based Drug Company and Pfizer have settled a court dispute over Lipitor, cholesterol lowering drug. The dispute started in 2003 regarding a generic version of the drug that was marketed by Ranbaxy. Pfizer also sue Ranbaxy over patents expiring in 2016 regarding the active ingredient in Lipidor. The Settlement allows Ranbaxy to market the generic version in 2011, keeping copies of the cholesterol pill of the U.S market for an extra 20 months thus protecting 12 billion in sales to Pfizer. The aforementioned settlement also allows Ranbaxy to sell the generic drug on various dates in seven other countries including Canada, Australia and Germany. Pfizer and Ranbaxy also agreed that Ranbaxy will stop contesting the validity of Pfizer patents in several specified
Posted by: Meirav Shalem in USPTO, US, trademark, Lawsuits on
Jun 18, 2008
Johnson & Johnson and humanitarian organization American Red Cross have agreed to end their legal dispute over use of the symbol of a greek red cross over a white background, which is internationally recognized as associated with both entities. J&J claimed that there has been a past agreement saying that the Red Cross can only use the symbol for non-commercial purposes, while the Red Cross broke that agreement by giving licenses for commercial purposes such as for selling of first aid kits in the US. The resolution allows both sides to continue to use the symbol. Each of the entities has used this symbol as a known trademark for more than a decade, making the claiming of a known trademark a rather futile claim. The agreement accepts the last rulings by U.S. District Court Judge Jed
<< Start < Prev 1 2 Next > End >> |
|
|
|
 |
Partners |
 |
|
.jpg)
.jpg)
