Top 5 Patent Law Blog Posts of the Week


Today we continue our weekly installment highlighting the best of the patent blogosphere from the past week. If there are any patent blogs you think should be highlighted by our Top 5, please comment on this post and we’ll check them out.

1) Patents Post-Grant: Supplemental Examination Rules Issued by USPTO – This post breaks down the USPTO’s Notice of Proposed Rule Making and how it outlines the procedures for conducting supplemental examination.

2) IP Watchdog: Business Methods by the Numbers: A Look Inside PTO Class 705 -As Gene Quinn explains, “The United States Patent Classification System is a system for organizing all U.S. patents into a smaller sub-collection of patents based on common subject matter. Each subject matter division includes a major component, which is called a class, and a minor component, which is called a subclass.”  This post discusses Class 705, which is the generic class for innovations relating to business methods.

3) Patent Docs: The Medicines Company to Get Patent Term Extension – This post provides a breakdown of the settlement of litigation reached between the Medicines Company and APP Pharmaceuticals, and gives a detailed case background and procedural history explaining how the parties reached their final settlement.

4) The Tech Transfer Blog: New Pact Brings “Express” Licensing Concept to Sponsored Research Agreements – Binghamton University (my alma mater) developed what it is calling the Binghamton Express Square Terms or BEST Deal License, a nonexclusive, royalty-free license on patentable innovations that arise from sponsored research. This post explains how this express licensing is intended to benefit the sponsored research negotiating process while also establishing standards and predictability for its industry partners.

5) FOSS Patents: Samsung allowed to show Apple-Qualcomm contracts, letters and limited source code to foreign courts – This post details the impact of Samsung’s discovery  request being granted in its case with Qualcomm and how the U.S. District Court came to its decision. The post also compares the Samsung-Qualcomm matter with the Apple-Qualcomm matter.

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Leave a Reply

You share in the PLI Practice Center community, so we just ask that you keep things civil. Leave out the personal attacks. Do not use profanity, ethnic or racial slurs, or take shots at anyone's sexual orientation or religion. If you can't be nice, we reserve the right to remove your material and ban users who violate our Terms of Service.

You must be logged in to post a comment.