In my last two posts, I discussed cost considerations for obtaining a United States patent. However, I did not discuss prices and I know that most readers of this blog would like to see “ball park” estimates. First, it is essential to understand that with patent applications you will always “get what you pay for” […]
The Supreme Court reverses the Federal Circuit’s Indefiniteness Standard in a decision likely to negatively impact patent owners. As many know who have been involved in patent litigation, it is often impossible to determine claim meaning in some patents. This uncertainty makes patent claim construction extremely difficult – both for the lawyer advising a client […]
At the risk of over simplification, most companies employ one or more of four quality “levels” patents. Often companies will have patents from a mixture of the levels below. Sometimes, this mixture occurs as a result of design and prioritization. Sometimes, it occurs as the result of political influence within the company or other factors. […]
On September 16, 2011 President Obama signed into law the Leahy-Smith Patent Reform Act, thereby ending the most favorable patent system in the world for legitimate small businesses. The law is lengthy (169 pages) and complex. Furthermore, the provisions of the new law have a variety of effective dates. Some of the provisions are effective […]
The foundation of United States patent law is based on a quid pro quo between the patent applicant (or patentee) and the government. The government grants a monopoly for the invention in exchange for a technology disclosure which should increase the public’s collective knowledge. Once the patent expires, anyone is then free to practice the […]
Many businessmen and engineers evaluate patents for one reason or another. Usually, the process boils down to an interpretation of patent claims. As defined in other posts on this site, patent claims are the governmental monopoly granted to an inventor in exchange for the inventor’s disclosure of technology. Unfortunately, claims are usually stated in a […]
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has recently announced that it has prepared further interim guidance for the patent examining corps to use when determining subject matter eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101 in view of the recent decision by the United States Supreme Court in Bilski v. Kappos. This interim guidance is a […]
The Supreme Court issued its ruling in the infamous “In re Bilski” case today. The bottom line: Bad news for Bilski, but probably good news for software patent holders. Bilski attempted to claim a hedging method as his invention. Specifically, “a method of provide one of a good or service to at least one entity […]
The Legacy Approach: For decades, patent attorneys have been taught to submit claims to the USPTO that are as broad as possible. The theory is that submission of broad claims are opening gambits in a negotiation process that will ultimately yield the correct scope of claims for the applicant. The Current Situation: The patent prosecution […]
While there is no reason to go into the entire history of software patents, it is fair to say that filings of software patents increased exponentially during the 1990s. In 1998, in a case called State Street Bank & Trust Co. v. Signature Financial Group, Inc., the Federal Circuit held business methods were eligible for […]