Patents Law Blog

How To Obtain A Patent In California

Wednesday, March 7, 2012 by Thomas I. Rozsa

A patent is a grant issued by the U.S. government that gives an inventor the right to exclude all others from making, using, or selling his or her invention. To obtain a patent, the inventor, or business for which the invention was made, must file a patent application with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). The cost of filing depends on the type of patent application, and whether the applicant is a small entity, such as an inventor, small business, or... Read More

Posted at 12:39 PM | PERMALINK

Topic: Patents

Changes To The Inequitable Conduct Defense

Wednesday, February 1, 2012 by Daniel J. Santos

On May 25, 2011, the
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) issued a long-awaited en banc decision
in Therasense, Inc. v. Becton, Dickinson
& Co., 2011
U.S. App. LEXIS 10590 (Fed. Cir. 2011).
The decision raises the standard for proving inequitable conduct
and presumably will make it much more difficult for defendants to succeed on the
Read More

Posted at 12:57 PM | PERMALINK

Topic: Patents

Considerations when Evaluating the Validity of a U.S. Patent

Sunday, December 25, 2011 by Robert J. Sayfie

Considerations when Evaluating the Validity of a U.S. Patent:

1. Is the
patent expired? In the United States, utility
patents are enforceable for a period of twenty (20) years from the filing
date, if the maintenance fees have been paid. Design
patents are enforceable for 14 years after the... Read More

Posted at 12:15 PM | PERMALINK

Topic: Patents

Federal Circuit Finds Assigned "Inventions and Discoveries" Extends to Continuation Applications

Thursday, September 8, 2011 by James G. McEwen

In M HL Tek, LLC v. Nissan Motor Co.,
99 USPQ2d 1681 (Fed. Cir. 2011), MHL Tek, LLC (“MHL”), the controversy
surrounds the ownership of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,663,496 (“the �496
patent”), 5,741,966 (“the �966 patent”), and U.S. Patent No. 5,731,516
(“the �516 patent”), all of which relate to... Read More

Posted at 10:18 AM | PERMALINK

Topic: Patents

Federal Circuit Finds Prosecution History Estoppel Prevents Coverage of Equivalent Since Amendment Was Foreeseable Equivalent

Thursday, September 8, 2011 by James G. McEwen

In Duramed Pharmaceuticals, Inc v Paddock Labritories, Inc., 644 F3d 1376, 99 USPQ2d 1388 (Fed. Cir. 2011), Duramed (now known as Teva Women’s Health Inc.) owns U.S. Patent No. 5,908,638 (‘638 patent.), which is directed to estrogen pharmaceutical compositions. When originally filed, original independent claim 1 recited a conjugated estrogen pharmaceutical composition “coated with a moisture barrier coating,” and original dependent claim 7 limi... Read More

Posted at 10:14 AM | PERMALINK

Topic: Patents

Are all computer programs patentable? No

Sunday, August 21, 2011 by Robert J. Sayfie

What kind of computer programs are patentable?

A case decided 16 August 2011 provides an answer. In the case of CYBERSOURCE CORPORATOIN v RETAIL DECISIONS, INC., the court stated,

“to impart patent-eligibility to an otherwise unpatentable process under the theory that the process is linked to a machine, the use of the machine “must impose... Read More

Posted at 12:23 PM | PERMALINK

Topic: Patents

Feature Comment: An Overview of the Patent Reform Act of 2011

Thursday, July 21, 2011 by James G. McEwen

By Grant Gildehaus and James G. McEwenEver since June 8, 2005, Representative Lamar Smith, then Chairman of the House Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet, and Intellectual Property, along with several co-sponsors, have attempted to change the U.S. patent system. In 2005, this was through introduction of H.R. 2795. Popularly known as the “Patent Reform Act of 2005 ,” the Patent Reform Act was an omnibus bill which overhauled multiple aspects of patent practice. Whil... Read More

Posted at 08:44 AM | PERMALINK

Topic: Patents

Patent Reform Was Long Overdue

Saturday, June 25, 2011 by Michelle McCliman

The new patent reform will make processing applications smoother and create more certainty for inventors and owners.... Read More

Posted at 12:32 PM | PERMALINK

Topic: Patents

OBVIOUSNESS

Saturday, June 18, 2011 by Robert J. Sayfie

A recent precedential decision from the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, In re Klein, discusses the obviousness of U.S. Patent Application No. 10/200,747 under 35 U.S.C. §103. Inventor, Arnold G. Klein (“Klein”), appeals the final decision of the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (“Board”), which rejected certain claims provided in the patent... Read More

Posted at 22:28 PM | PERMALINK

Topic: Patents