BLW 360 – January 27, 2015 Jonathan LA Phillips

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Patents Under U.S. Law © 2006 David W. Opderbeck.
Advertisements

Disclaimer: The information provided by the USPTO is meant as an educational resource only and should not be construed as legal advice or written law.
Disclaimer: The information provided by the USPTO is meant as an educational resource only and should not be construed as legal advice or written law.
Patent Strategy Under the AIA Washington in the West January 29, 2013.
EACCNJ European Union IP Forum Mark DeLuca Pepper Hamilton LLP September 27, 2012.
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
INTRODUCTION TO PATENT RIGHTS The Business of Intellectual Property
The America Invents Act (AIA) - Rules and Implications of First to File, Prior Art, and Non-obviousness -
Disclaimer: The information provided by the USPTO is meant as an educational resource only and should not be construed as legal advice or written law.
U.S. ARMY ARMAMENT RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT & ENGINEERING CENTER (ARDEC) Presented to: Federal Laboratory Consortium Northeast Region 25 Feb 2014 Mr. Tim.
Patents Copyright © Jeffrey Pittman. Pittman - Cyberlaw & E- Commerce 2 Legal Framework of Patents The U.S. Constitution, Article 1, Section 8:
Determining Obviousness under 35 USC 103 in view of KSR International Co. v. Teleflex TC3600 Business Methods January 2008.
Intellectual Property
Intellectual Property Boston College Law School March 3, 2008 Patent - Nonobviousness.
Patent Overview by Jeff Woller. Why have Patents? Patents make some people rich – but, does that seem like something the government should protect? Do.
Intellectual Property Patent Primer Michael Pratt Executive Director, Business Development November 1, 2011.
Patents 101 April 1, 2002 And now, for something new, useful and not obvious.
Intellectual Property Boston College Law School February 16, 2009 Patent – Novelty.
® ® From Invention to Start-Up Seminar Series University of Washington The Legal Side of Things Invention Protection Gary S. Kindness Christensen O’Connor.
Lauren MacLanahan Office of Technology Licensing GTRC.
1 1 AIPLA Firm Logo American Intellectual Property Law Association Hamilton Beach Brands v. Sunbeam Products: Lessons Learned Naomi Abe Voegtli IP Practice.
Protecting Your Ideas and Inventions: Patents, Trademarks, Servicemarks and Copyrights.
© 2010 Hodgson Russ LLP IEEE Southern Area Entrepreneur’s Day Overview Of The Patent Process R. Kent Roberts Hodgson Russ LLP (716)
Wireless Mobile Devices Patents Dr. Tal Lavian UC Berkeley Engineering, CET Week 3.
Stem Cells Peter Paras, Jr.. 2 Overview Introduction — Definitions Types of Stem Cells — Origin Examination of Stem Cell Claims — Statutes — Sample Claims.
Intellectual Property
Overview of IP Protection Mechanisms in the United States Presented by: Daniel Waymel UT Dallas – August 2013.
Intellectual Property. John Ayers February 25, 2005.
The Patent Process. Protection of Ideas or Inventions An idea/know how Generally speaking, we would like to protect inventions that have significant commercial.
What is Intellectual Property ? Patents- protection of technology Trademarks- protection of domain names and product identity Copyrights- protection of.
Intellectual Property What is intellectual property? What is intellectual property? US IP protection- US IP protection- Patent application process Patent.
Intellectual Property Leza Besemann, Technology Strategy Manager November 25, 2014 ME 4054W.
Patent Law Presented by: Walker & Mann, LLP Walker & Mann, LLP 9421 Haven Ave., Suite 200 Rancho Cucamonga, Ca Office.
2/2/09 - L14 PatentsCopyright Joanne DeGroat, ECE, OSU1 Patents.
Introduction to IP Ellen Monson Director Intellectual Property Office University of Cincinnati.
Intellectual Property Part 2: Trademarks, Patents & Piracy Mr. Garfinkel, 2/21/14 An illustration from U.S. patent # 5,375,430, a 'gravity- powered shoe.
Preparing a Provisional Patent Application Hay Yeung Cheung, Ph.D. Myers Wolin, LLC March 16, 2013 Trenton Computer Festival 1.
Josiah Hernandez Patentability Requirements. Useful Having utilitarian or commercial value Novel No one else has done it before If someone has done it.
Jump to first page (C) 1998, Arun Lakhotia 1 Intellectual Property Arun Lakhotia University of Southwestern Louisiana Po Box Lafayette, LA 70504,
The Basics of Intellectual Property Law Understanding IP by A. David Spevack, Office of Naval Research.
New Sections 102 & 103 (b) Conditions for Patentability- (1) IN GENERAL- Section 102 of title 35, United States Code, is amended to read as follows: -`Sec.
6.1 Chapter 6 Patents © 2003 by West Legal Studies in Business/A Division of Thomson Learning.
Overview Validity of patent hinges on novelty, utility, and non-obviousness Utility generally not an issue Pre-suit investigation focuses on infringement,
11/18/2015Powell Patent Law Associates, LLC1 PATENT BASICS Marvin J Powell, Esquire
Patents IV Nonobviousness
© 2008 International Intellectual Property June 16, 2009 Class 2 Introduction to Patents.
Lecture 27 Intellectual Property. Intellectual Property simply defined is any form of knowledge or expression created with one's intellect. It includes.
HARVARD UNIVERSITY Office of Technology Development
Fundamentals of Intellectual Property
1 Teaching Innovation - Entrepreneurial - Global The Centre for Technology enabled Teaching & Learning, N Y S S, India DTEL DTEL (Department for Technology.
Patents and the Patenting Process Patents and the Inventor’s role in the Patenting Process.
The Impact of Patent Reform on Independent Inventors and Start-up Companies Mark Nowotarski (Patent Agent)
Introduction to Intellectual Property Class of Sept
Patents 101 March 28, 2006 And now, for something new, useful and not obvious.
An introduction to Intellectual property protection TG © Copyright by Stevens Institute of Technology.
Patents 101 March 28, 2006 And now, for something new, useful and not obvious.
Patents and Trade Secrets
Patents and Trade Secrets
INTELECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS
Nuts and Bolts of Patent Law
Patents IV Nonobviousness
Stem Cells Peter Paras, Jr.
Overview of IP Protection Mechanisms in the United States
What You Didn’t Know That You Didn’t Know About Patents
Jonathan D’Silva MMI Intellectual Property 900 State Street, Suite 301
Presentation transcript:

BLW 360 – January 27, 2015 Jonathan LA Phillips

 A grant from the USTPO  What bargain is struck between the inventor and the government?  Whats it get you? Why is it more powerful than © & trade secret?  Utility, design, and plant patents  No common law rights  Focus on utility patents. If questions about others, please raise them.

 Utility, design, or plant;  Useful, ornamental, or distinctive;  Novel;  Non-obvious.

 Apply to USPTO  Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP).  Title 37 Code fo Federal Regulations

 “whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter or an improvement.” - 35 USC § 101.  What is a process? A machine? A manufacture? A composition of mater?

 Must be of some use to society. What isn’t useful?  Are research articles useful?  Application must specify the usefulness. Why?

 Must be “new.”  First to file switch with America Invents Act. You’re lucky, it was a lot worse in the bad ole’ days.  What makes something not novel? Publication / Public Use  Can an inventor make his own invention non-patentable for not being novel?

 What is non-obviousness? Is it the same as novelty? If not, how is it different?  Prior art. What is it?

 Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 US 1 (1966) Analogous prior art. Differences & superior results. Level of ordinary Skill Bonus – Secondary Considerations – needs nexus  Commercial success  Long felt need  Commercial acquiesence  Copying

 Combination patents What is a combination patent? Example? How are these not obvious, they are combinations.  KSR International Inc. v. Teleflex, 550 US 398 (2007). Fighting words – “ordinary innovation” and “predictable results.” Did it kill off the “teaching, suggestion, motivation test?”  Double patenting & terminal disclosures

 Diamond v. Chakrabarty, 447 US 303 (1980) “anything under the sun made by man.”  Laws of nature.  How do you get a patent on these, indirectly? Diamond v. Diehr, 450 US 175 (1981)  Bilski v. Kappos, 130 S. Ct (2010).

 Usefulness  ornamentality.  Article of manufacture  New  Original  Ornamental  What other forms of IP can cover design patents? Examples? Advantages / Disadvantages.

 To my knowledge, no one has a background that suggests they care about plant patents, but know that the Plant Variety Protection Act protects them as well and is administered by Dept. of Agriculture

 Know the chart on page 350.

 Specification;  Claims;  Drawing;  Oath.

 Describes invention and tells how to make it.  Must be enabling. Why?  Must provide best mode. Why?

TYPES  We will have an exercise on this later on, so pay attention. Look at p  Define the scope of invention in one sentence. Independent claims; Dependent claims. Functional (means plus function) Product-by- process (defines the product by its process Jepson (an improvement) Why would you use this one? Markush (chemistry & biochemistry)

 Do you have to provide a prototype? Can the USPTO make you? How can you know it works without a prototype?

 OF INVENTOR AIA changed that. Joint applications. Typical attack.

 What is an office action?  How do you fix it? How do you get around non-obviousness? Can you amend the specification? If so, how?  Divisional / Continuing applications. When are these needed? Advantages?  The examiner still won’t grant the registration. Now what?

 Protests New under AIA When would you use it? Why? What do you do?  Derivation Proceedings

PROSCONS  Ultimate protection  No independently created inventions  May be only source of protection  …  Only 20 years  No protection until registration  Costly  Have to disclose to world  …