All posts by Jonathan Hummel

Patently-O Bits and Bytes

May 24, 2010PatentFederal Circuit En Banc, Inequitable Conduct, Licenses, Written DescriptionJonathan Hummel

Trademark / Antitrust: The Supreme Court has ruled against the National Football League (NFL) in an antitrust suit involving the NFL’s exclusive apparel licensing deal with Reebok/Adidas. The court held that the NFL was not a single business entity, but rather 32 separate business entities. Any antitrust violation involves an underlying market. Here, the supreme court identified that as the market for intellectual property: “Directly relevant here, the teams are potentially competing suppliers in the market for intellectual property. When teams license such property, they are not pursuing the common interests of the whole league, but, instead, the interests of each corporation itself.” In Princo, the Federal Circuit is now considering antitrust issues in the scope of patents and standard-setting organizations. [Read NFL v. American Needle] [Read about Princo v. ITC]
The Chisum Patent Academy is offering its second annual Intensive Patent Law Training Workshop in Seattle on July 29-31, 2010. See http://www.chisum-patent-academy.com. The workshop will focus on substantive patent law (patentability and enforcement) through analysis of critical Federal Circuit and Supreme Court decisions. [Syllabus for 2009 workshop]. New material for 2010 likely include business method patentability post-Bilski, written description requirement compliance post-Ariad, and the evolving landscape of inequitable conduct as reflected by the Federal Circuit’s recent grant of rehearing en banc in Therasense. The workshop is team-taught in seminar style (maximum of 10 students) by Donald Chisum, author of the treatise Chisum on Patents, and Professor Janice Mueller, author of Patent Law, 3d Edition (Aspen 2009). Chisum and Mueller have a combined total of over 40 years experience teaching patent law. The workshop’s coverage is geared for junior patent attorneys, summer associates, engineers, scientists, paralegals, information specialists, and attorneys experienced in non-patent fields who desire an intensive introduction to patent law. Eighteen hours of CLE credit have been applied for.
USPTO News:
- The USPTO is further developing its patent prosecution highway and has eliminated the associated fee. [Link]
- USPTO is on Facebook [Link][Me on Facebook]
- Green Technology: The USPTO has expanded the number of technology classes that count as “green technology” and that are therefore eligible for expedited processing. [Link]

Kathy Bates on NBC as a former patent attorney. Best quote of the clip is 30–seconds-in.

Patent Pendency

May 23, 2010PatentJonathan Hummel

Thus, about 10% of applications filed in 2004 are still pending while over 60% of those filed in 2007 are still pending.

Patently-O Bits and Bytes

May 19, 2010PatentJonathan Hummel

Grant Rate: The USPTO’s high patent grant numbers continue. The past two weeks respectively rank Nos. 1 and 2 in terms of the most patents granted in a single week in US history.
USPTO Application Exchange: The USPTO has announced that it is opening its “application exchange program” to all applicants. Any applicant with at least two pending applications can “receive expedited review of one application in exchange for withdrawing an unexamined application.” For 2010, the program will be limited to 15 applications per entity. Applicants with questions may contact Pinchus Laufer (Office of the Associate Commissioner for Patent Examination Policy) Pinchus.Laufer@uspto.gov.
PTO/DOJ/FTC Workshop on May 26th at the USPTO. The FTC’s work and report on problems in the patent system has been a driving force behind many of the proposed patent reform initiatives over the past several years. Later this month, the FTC will be joining the PTO and DOJ for a workshop on the role of intellectual property in competitive markets. Particular topics include PTO Reform (quality and timing); Permanent Injunctions and the ITC; and Standard Setting. Webcast available. [Link]
Ombudsman Program: The PTO has implemented a new ombudsman program intended to help applicants who feel that the ordinary prosecution process has broken-down. [Link] I would like to hear any comments on the value of the program.

— Dennis

Donald Chisum: Ariad (2010) and the Overlooked Invention Priority Principle

May 9, 2010PatentClaim Construction, Enablement, obviousness, Written DescriptionJonathan Hummel

In a new essay for the Patently-O Patent Law Journal, Donald Chisum considers the "invention priority principle" and its role in the written description analysis.

There may be a solution: application of an established patent law priority principle. The principle focuses on a specific embodiment of a generically claimed invention as a constructive reduction to practice, that is, as a completion of the inventive process. Adopting this solution would preserve the written description of the invention's (WDIs) independence and applicability to original claims but would remove WDI as a standard for assessing the scope of a patent claim. WDI would continue to govern whether, at the time an applicant files an application, he or she has completed the inventive process, that is, "possesses" the invention. But only enablement would govern how broadly the applicant is entitled to claim that invention. It may be possible to implement this priority principle interpretation of Ariad without contradicting its clear holdings.

Cite as Donald S. Chisum, Written Description of the Invention: Ariad (2010) and the Overlooked Invention Priority Principle, 2010 Patently-O Patent L.J. 72.

Other Patently-O Patent Law Journal publications:

Kevin Collins, An Initial Comment on Ariad: Written Description and the Baseline of Patent Protection for After-Arising Technology, 2010 Patently-O Patent L.J. 60.
Etan Chatlynne, Investigating Patent Law’s Presumption of Validity—An Empirical Analysis, 2010 Patently-O Patent L.J. 37.
Michael Kasdan and Joseph Casino, Federal Courts Closely Scrutinizing and Slashing Patent Damage Awards, 2010 Patently-O Patent L.J. 24.
Dennis Crouch, Broadening Federal Circuit Jurisprudence: Moving Beyond Federal Circuit Patent Cases, 2010 Patently-O Patent L.J. 19.
Edward Reines and Nathan Greenblatt, Interlocutory Appeals of Claim Construction in the Patent Reform Act of 2009, Part II, 2010 Patently-O Patent L.J. 7.
Gregory P. Landis & Loria B. Yeadon, Selecting the Next Nominee for the Federal Circuit: Patently Obvious to Consider Diversity, 2010 Patently-O Patent L.J. 1.
Edward Reines, and Nathan Greenblatt, Interlocutory Appeals of Claim Construction in the Patent Reform Act of 2009, 2009 Patently-O Patent L.J. 1.
Paul Cole, Patentability of Computer Software As Such, 2008 Patently-O Patent L.J. 1.
Mark R. Patterson, Reestablishing the Doctrine of Patent Exhaustion, 2007 Patently-O Patent L.J. 38
Arti K. Rai, The GSK Case: An Administrative Perspective, 2007 Patently-O
Patent L.J. 36.
Joshua D. Sarnoff, BIO v. DC and the New Need to Eliminate Federal Patent Law Preemption of State and Local Price and Product Regulation, 2007 Patently-O Patent L.J. 30
John F. Duffy, Are Administrative Patent Judges Unconstitutional?, 2007 Patently-O Patent L.J. 21.
Joseph Casino and Michael Kasdan, In re Seagate Technology: Willfulness and Waiver, a Summary and a Proposal, 2007 Patently-O Patent L.J. 1.

Patently-O Bits and Bytes

April 21, 2010PatentJonathan Hummel

New Blog:
- 1.8.8. IP Policy Blog by David Connaughton (as in the Constitutional provision, Article 1; Section 8; Clause 8.). Recent posts include “The Case for Broad Patentable Subject Matter” and “The Case for Limited Patentable Subject Matter.” Connaughton is a graduating 3L at Franklin Pierce Law Center.
New Job Postings:
Upcoming Events:
- April 27-28: Corporate IP Counsel Summit in New York City (Helmsley Hotel).
- April 30: Federal Circuit Patent Law Year-in-Review in Kansas City.
- May 20: Federal Circuit Judicial Conference in Washington DC. (This is Judge Michel’s final judicial conference as Chief Judge)

Patently-O Bits and Bytes

April 19, 2010PatentJonathan Hummel

In March 2010, I reported on the Myriad case where the district court essentially held that all gene patents are invalid. Since then the popular press has been pushing-hard on gene patenting stories. My former boss Kevin Noonan (MBHB) has been the go-to-man for reporters looking for a supporter of genetic patents. Noonan is articulate, opinionated, reasonable, and he looks good on camera. In its article, the Washington Post spends most of its text discussing the fact that Noonan is the former high-school-sweetheart and ex-husband of Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor.
Watch Kevin Noonan on 60–Minutes
Watch Kevin Noonan on the Colbert Report

Patently-O Bits and Bytes

April 8, 2010PatentJonathan Hummel

A number of jobs have been recently posted to the Patently-O Job Board.

Allergan is looking for a Patent Agent with a strong chemistry background.
Oxane Materials is looking for a Patent Liaison with a strong background in material science or inorganic chemistry.
Bluestone Innovations is seeking an in-house patent attorney to support its new business of acquisition, licensing, and enforcement of patent rights.
Hodgson Russ is looking for an entry-level patent attorney to work in its Buffalo NY office with a focus on mechanical engineering prosecution. PTO registration and some prosecution experience preferred.
Celula is looking for a Patent Agent with a background in biochemistry or related fields.
McGlinchey Stafford is looking for an experienced chemical patent prosecutor to work in its Baton Rouge office.
A Chicago-based IP/FDA focused firm is looking for experienced patent prosecutors and portfolio managers (pharma, food, dietary supplement related). PhD’s and portable book of business preferred.
Intellectual Ventures is seeking a senior licensing attorney.
T-Mobile is seeking an experienced patent attorney to advise on patent prosecution and other intellectual property matters.
Marjama Muldoon is looking for an experienced patent attorney (4+ years) to join the Syracuse-based law firm.

Patent-Law Job Outlook?:

Note – I have no justification for the 2^nd order polynomial trendline that I used except that it satisfies my hope that we have hit some bottom and that things are moving up.

Patently-O Bits and Bytes

April 2, 2010PatentUSPTO DirectorJonathan Hummel

USPTO Design Day: April 6 at the USPTO. Speakers include Bob Stoll (Patent Commissioner), Jasemine Chambers (USPTO Tech Center Director), Clive Roux (ISDA), Perry Saidman (Saidman), Richard Stockton (Banner), Susan Farley (Heslen), Damon Neagle (Design IP), etc.
USPTO BPAI Conference: April 7 at the USPTO. Speakers include Director Kappos, Federal Circuit Chief Judge Michel and Judge Rader, BPAI Chief Judge Flemming, and Vice-Chief Judges Moore and MacDonald, Greg Morse of the USPTO Central Reexamination Unit, Todd Baker (Oblon), Gary Harkcom (Greenblum), Steve Kunin (Oblon), Michael Messinger (Sterne), Brad Pederson (Patterson), Theresa Rea (Crowell), and Charlie Van Horn (Finnegan).

Patently-O Bits and Bytes No. 327

March 23, 2010PatentEnablement, Written DescriptionJonathan Hummel

Supreme Court: My sense is that Ariad v. Eli Lilly has essentially no shot for Supreme Court review unless the Ariad can do a great job of convincing the court that the written description requirement as applied is (1) new and (2) is severely detrimental to the patenting of breakthrough inventions and discoveries.
Supreme Court: A decision in Bilski is expected in the next 6 weeks – perhaps as soon as March 30.
Upcoming events:
- I am traveling the next 10 days or so, but have pre-written a set of interesting (in my view) blog posts.
- On the 25^th and 26^thof March, I'll be speaking at the Miami-based IP Law Summit (then to Disney with the kids…).
- April 27^th, I'll be speaking in New York at the Corporate IP Counsel Summit
- On April 30, I'll be speaking in Kansas City at a KCMBA IP law event.
- On May 20, the Federal Circuit is hosting its annual conference with an all-star lineup.
- Statute of Anne: Two competing conferences are being held on the 300^th anniversary of the Statute of Anne (the first copyright statute). (If I were turning 300, I'd want at least two parties.) The first is on March 27 at Cardozo Law School in New York [Link] and the second is on April 9-10 at Berkeley Law School [Link]. Professors Peter Jaszi (American) and Daniel Gervais (Vanderbilt) will be speaking at both events.

Patently-O Bits and Bytes

March 16, 2010PatentUSPTO DirectorJonathan Hummel

PTO General Counsel James Toupin is retiring this week. Raymond Chen is the Deputy GC and Solicitor.
Next Week’s Miami-Based IP Law Summit (March 25-27). Speakers include top IP counsel from Home Depot, Alcoa, Altera, Medtronic, Lenovo, Du Pont, Caterpillar, Coach, Tyco, NBA, Ralph Lauren, Burger King, Kodak, Southwire, Xerox, Darden, Bayer, Harley-Davidson, Boeing, and IBM. I am also speaking as are Robert Stoll (Commissioner of Patents) and Lynne Beresford (Commissioner of Trademarks). [Link]
Corporate IP Counsel Summit (April 27-28) in New York. Speakers include Patently-O contributors David Boundy (Cantor Fitz), Charles Macedo, Bruce Pokras (Pfizer), Tim Wilson (SAS), and myself. Others speakers are coming from the NFL, NBC, AT&T, Motorola, Kodak, Siemens, Raytheon, Go Daddy, ICANN, Purdue, IBM, Thomson Reuters, New Balance, etc. (Use code FCZ835 when registering for a $500 discount). [Link]
GWU is hosting excellent patent law symposium on May 11, 2010 with Chief Judge Michel, PTO Director Kappos and former Director Dickinson, Judges Fogel, Huff & Ericksen, Professors Duffy and Whealan, and top IP counsel from SAP, Motorola, Microsoft, Eli Lilly, Caterpillar, etc. [Link]
2010 Midwest IP Institute on May 7, 2010 in Overland Park, Kansas with former PTO Director Bruce Lehman, Professor David Hricik, Steve Kunin and Ken Germain. Sponsored by the Kansas Bar Ass’n.
110 Year Patent: Last week’s Amazon 1-Click post included a typo suggesting that the patent would expire in the year 2107 (instead of 2017). Several readers wrote-in with corrections including one who questioned: “Is this is a typo or is it Patent Reform?”
From its founding, the Franklin Pierce Law Center has focused on teaching patent law and training future patent attorneys. The law school today announced that it is merging with the University of New Hampshire and will become the University of New Hampshire School of Law. The school plans to maintain its well known Franklin Pierce brand-name in the IP market for some time. Franklin Pierce is a headline-advertiser on the Patently-O Job Board.
Darby & Darby is dissolving. Of the “big-five” New York IP Firms, only Kenyon is left.
Although Not Directly Patent Related, I have really enjoyed reading these working papers by my University of Missouri Law School colleagues:
- Discriminatory Housing Advertisements On-Line: Lessons from Craigslist by Prof Oliveri (The Fair Housing Act’s “current small-landlord exemption should be reconfigured to [also] protect roommates, and therefore to hew more closely to its original purpose.”).
- The Movement Toward Early Case Handling in Courts and Private Dispute Resolution by Prof Lande. Lande’s discussion of early case handling methods has clear implications for both patent litigation and patent prosecution.
- Jurisdictional Discovery in United States Federal Courts by Prof Strong (“the author is unaware of any other legal system that undertakes this type of labor-intensive, adverse proceeding before the jurisdiction of the court is even established”).
- Shadows on the Cathedral: Solar Access Laws in a Different Light by Prof Rule (the law should provide landowners “an alternative means of purchasing solar access rights from neighbors when voluntary bargaining proves unsuccessful”).
- A Reappraisal of Attorneys’ Fees in Bankruptcy by Prof Cecil (“This Article proposes a statutory amendment to the Bankruptcy Code that establishes clear guidelines for when debtors’ attorneys are entitled to have their fees treated as administrative priority expenses in a bankruptcy proceeding.”).
And another non-patent post from my favorite local food writer Scott Rowson: “So the recipe for no-knead bread in last week’s Tribune doesn’t actually say ‘remove dough from towel before cooking,’ so it appears I may be responsible for a few dozen incinerated tea towels around town. Seriously, three people have emailed questions along those lines. So yes, remove the towel from the bread before BAKING IT FOR 45 MINUTES. Failure to do this will cause a fire. Also, shut the oven door after placing the pot inside – I left that out too.” [Link]

Patently-O Bits and Bytes

March 9, 2010PatentJonathan Hummel

Free Podcast: Professer Meurer (BU) discusses his book: Patent Failure and takes “a hard look at the American patent system and why many innovators consider this system and the institutions created to protect patents complete failures.”
Fashion Law: Boston globe article on fashion law and profile of Professor Suk (who wants to creat a new law protecting fashion). Suk’s point of view differs from Professors Sprigman and Raustiala who argue that piracy & knock-offs are good for the fashion industry.
I’m considering the following query: Is it possible to move from an invention-date-focused regime (FTI) to one that is filing-date-focused (FTF) in a way that is “validity neutral?”

Investigating Patent Law’s Presumption of Validity—An Empirical Analysis

March 5, 2010PatentJonathan Hummel

Etan Chatlynne reports post-KSR patent validity decisions with a special focus on the presumption of validity and the clear and convincing standard for rebutting that presumption. He finds that the presumption and evidentiary standard did not affect thirty-eight of forty-five (84%) Federal Circuit invalidity determinations made between April 2008 and June 2009. The standards may have affected the remaining seven of forty-five (16%) determinations. [Download Chatlynne.PresumptionofValidity.Final]

Etan Chatlynne, Investigating Patent Law’s Presumption of Validity—An Empirical Analysis, 2010 Patently-O Patent L.J. 37.

Patently-O Bits and Bytes No. 322

March 4, 2010PatentInequitable Conduct, Marking, Written DescriptionJonathan Hummel

Chicago Area Creative Achievement Award: The Intellectual Property Law Association of Chicago (IPLAC) invites nominations for its 2010 Creative Achievement Award (formerly called the Inventor of the Year Award). In addition to recognizing inventors, the award is intended to recognize significant achievements in the creation of a trademark or service mark and related branding, marketing, and advertising activities, as well as achievements in literary, visual, musical, dramatic, and other arts protected by copyrights. The annual award may fall in any one of these categories for inventive/creative activity conducted in the Chicago metropolitan area. Details on criteria for the award and a nomination form are available on the IPLAC website. Nominations are due by Friday, March 12, 2010. IPLAC will announce the award winner at its Annual Meeting on May 4, 2010. Please email mrichards@brinkshofer.com or call Marc Richards at 312.321.4729, chair of IPLAC's Creative Achievement Award committee, with any questions.

Most popular Patently-O posts during the past month:

Federal Courts Closely Scrutinizing and Slashing Patent Damage Awards

March 3, 2010PatentClaim Construction, obviousnessJonathan Hummel

Michael Kasdan and Joseph Casino discuss recent shifts in reasonable royalty jurisprudence with a particular focus on the recent cases of Cornell, Lucent, and Lansa. Together, these decisions "indicate an emerging trend to more carefully scrutinize the evidentiary and economic basis of reasonable royalty-based patent damages awards in the setting of the appropriate royalty base, the application of the entire market value rule, and the calculation of the appropriate royalty rate." [Download Kasdan.Casino.Damages]

Cite as Michael Kasdan and Joseph Casino, Federal Courts Closely Scrutinizing and Slashing Patent Damage Awards, 2010 Patently-O Patent L.J. 24.

Other recent Patently-O Patent Law Journal Articles:

Dennis Crouch, Broadening Federal Circuit Jurisprudence: Moving Beyond Federal Circuit Patent Cases, 2010 Patently-O Patent L.J. 19.
Edward Reines and Nathan Greenblatt, Interlocutory Appeals of Claim Construction in the Patent Reform Act of 2009, Part II, 2010 Patently-O Patent L.J. 7.
Gregory P. Landis & Loria B. Yeadon, Selecting the Next Nominee for the Federal Circuit: Patently Obvious to Consider Diversity, 2010 Patently-O Patent L.J. 1.
Edward Reines, and Nathan Greenblatt, Interlocutory Appeals of Claim Construction in the Patent Reform Act of 2009, 2009 Patently-O Patent L.J. 1.

Patently-O Bits and Bytes

February 24, 2010PatentJonathan Hummel

InventorsEye is the PTO’s new publication for the independent inventor community with a goal of bi-monthly publication. Looks good. As expected, the publication provides good information with a solid mix of propaganda. The first InventorsEye article writes hopefully that “we currently offer a 50% discount for independent inventors in virtually every fee category. That fee is further reduced by another 50% for independent inventors who make use of our electronic filing system.” Of course, that statement is misleading because it implies that the 50% reduction for EFS use also applies to “virtually every fee category.” Rather, independent inventors receive a 50% reduction on most fees, and an additional 50% reduction on the $330 filing fee. Thus, to file a utility patent application, large-entities pay $1090 ($330 filing fee + $540 search fee +$220 examination fee); Independent inventors pay $545 ($165 filing fee + $270 search fee + $110 examination fee); and electronic filing independent inventors pay $462 ($82 filing fee + $270 search fee + $110 examination fee).
Chicago: For several years, the Northwestern Journal of Technology & Intellectual Property has been staging an annual IP symposium. This year’s speakers for the March 5 event include several law professors, Sharon Barner (PTO Deputy) and three partners from my former law firm (MBHB): Donald Zuhn, Joe Herndon, and Mike Baniak. Cost: Free ($200 for CLE Credit).
International IP Litigation Costs: Read the new WIPO Magazine special edition on IP Litigation Costs.

Broadening Federal Circuit Jurisprudence: Moving Beyond Federal Circuit Patent Cases

February 12, 2010PatentJonathan Hummel

[Update — SSRN Link Now Works] Download my five-page essay that forms the newest entry in the Patently-O Patent Law Journal: Broadening Federal Circuit Jurisprudence: Moving Beyond Federal Circuit Patent Cases, 2010 Patently-O Patent Law Journal 19 (2010). The essay is an expansion of my prior post on the SEB v. Montgomery Ward.

Abstract: Federal Circuit patent jurisprudence has typically focused on Federal Circuit law and Federal Circuit precedent. However, recent Supreme Court decisions such as eBay v. MercExchange, MedImmune v. Genentech, MGM v. Grokster, and KSR Intl. v. Teleflex cases have challenged that default position. These cases represent a directive from the Supreme Court that the interpretation of patent law doctrine requires a consideration of history and doctrines that arise from other areas of law. In this essay, I examine the recent Federal Circuit decision of SEB v. Montgomery Ward and consider whether that case represents a shift in Federal Circuit jurisprudence toward an increased influence of non-patent considerations when deciding patent cases and patent issues.

Interlocutory Appeals of Claim Construction in the Patent Reform Act of 2009, Part II

February 10, 2010PatentClaim ConstructionJonathan Hummel

Edward Reines and Nathan Greenblatt have returned with an extension of their 2009 article on the proposed right of interlocutory appeals of claim construction. This new article considers the impact of the recent Supreme Court decision of Mohawk Industries, Inc. v. Carpenter as well as proposed modifications to the Patent Reform Act of 2009. Cite as Edward Reines and Nathan Greenblatt, Interlocutory Appeals of Claim Construction in the Patent Reform Act of 2009, Part II, 2010 Patently-O Patent L.J. 7 (2010). [Download Part II Reines.2010][Download Part I, Reines,2009]

Patently-O Bits and Bytes

February 8, 2010PatentJonathan Hummel

The following is a list of upcoming events that I will be attending. I look forward to seeing you there!:

Texas Intellectual Property Law Journal’s 11th Annual Intellectual Property Symposium at The University of Texas School of Law in Austin on February 19th, 2010.
Stanford Technology Law Review Symposium at Stanford Law School focusing on “PTO Reform” on February 26, 2010.
IP Law Summit for Corporate IP Counsel in Miami at the Doral Resort on March 25–27, 2010.
Corporate IP Counsel Summit in New York City at the Helmsley Hotel on April 27–28, 2010.

If you are looking for me, I bear some resemblance to the photo on the right.

There are lots of recent patent law job postings. The following jobs were posed in the past two-weeks:

Edwards Angell Palmer & Dodge is seeking two candidates, each with a focus on biotechnology and superior credentials. [Junior/Midlevel Associate][Junior Attorney/Agent]
Oregon Health & Science University (OHSU) in beautiful Portland Oregon is seeking an in-house patent counsel.
Qualcomm is seeking a patent counsel for its portfolio management team in San Diego; an open source software attorney in San Diego; and patent attorneys with 3–5 years patent prosecution experience in multiple locations.
Life Technologies is seeking a patent agent to handle patent prosecution and portfolio management in the company’s DNA Sequencing Business Unit.
Intellectual Ventures (IV) is seeking a patent attorney who “loves fast-paced business action, is detail-oriented, independently motivated, and has the confidence and ability to interact with clients and co-workers in a professional, approachable, and positive manner.” (Bellevue Washington).
Edell Shapiro & Finnan is seeking a patent attorney (2–years patent prosecution experience) with a focus on mechanical engineering. (Rockville, Maryland).
ION Torrent Systems is seeking a patent attorney (at least 2–5 years experience) with semiconductor expertise to work in its San Francisco, California offices.
Fiala & Weaver is seeking part-time and full-time patent agents and patent attorneys for patent preparation and prosecution. The firm is located in Washington DC, but qualified remote candidates may be considered.

Patently-O Bits and Bytes

February 6, 2010PatentUSPTO DirectorJonathan Hummel

PTO Director Kappos has two interesting recent posts on his blog:

Reengineering the MPEP (Asking for suggestions on improving the MPEP and questioning whether it should be developed as a WIKI).
Thanks Patent Team (Anecdotes from practitioners that patent examiners are doing a better job of suggesting amendments that lead to allowance).

Patently-O Bits and Bytes No. 317

February 2, 2010PatentJonathan Hummel

Learning International IP: A relatively new patent-attorney asks the following question: “I find myself very unfamiliar with foreign patent practice. Could you recommend a book/other resource that discusses the intricacies of patent prosecution in foreign countries from the point-of-view of a US patent practitioner?” Suggestions?
Learning by Watching: Professor Beckerman-Rodau is spearheading an IP Podcast series available for free from Suffolk Law. [LINK]
Learning IP Theory: Three fairly new books recently arrived in the mail. All would be considered left leaning.

Property Outlaws: How Squatters, Pirates, and Protesters Improve the Law of Ownership by Peñalver and Katyal. The book explains benefits of occasional disregard of private property.
The Soul of Creativity: Forging a Moral Rights Law for the United States by Kwall. The book argues that “moral rights” should be part of US copyright law. Although Kwall focuses on the personal experience of authorship, her arguments are difficult (for me) to distinguish from those regarding the personal experience of invention.
The Future of the Internet–And How to Stop It by Zittrain. The book is about battle over control of the internet or how the internet is increasingly controlled.