Patent Law Practice Center

America Invents: How the New Law Impacts Your Patent Practice

Written by Gene Quinn, of IPWatchdog and Practice Center Contributor.

The Practising Law Institute will host a one-day program titled America Invents Act: How the New Law Impacts Your Clients and Your Patent Practice. This event will be on Monday, September 26, 2011, and will take place live at PLI’s San Francisco Center in downtown San Francisco, California. The program will be webcast live over the Internet for all those who are unable to make it to the live location.

PLI has assembled a team of experienced patent practitioners who have closely followed the patent reform debate, and I am honored to be among those who will speak at this event. The faculty will discuss the realities of the new legislation and how the new law will immediately impact the patenting process for businesses and attorneys. If the e-mails we have exchanged furiously over the last several weeks in preparation are any indication this program will present a thorough and comprehensive review of the major aspects of the legislation. The plan is to dig deep and give the patent practitioner actionable information, recommendations and things to look out for. Legislative language will be examined carefully, as well as likely interpretations and problem areas that will almost certainly remain uncertain until the Federal Circuit and perhaps the Supreme Court weighs in.

Click here for the full IPWatchdog article and for more details about PLI’s upcoming program America Invents Act: How the New Law Impacts Your Clients and Your Patent Practice.

Top 10 Reasons to Take the PLI Patent Bar Review Course

 

What is Prior Art?

Written by Gene Quinn (of IPWatchdog and Practice Center Contributor)

Unfortunately there is no easy answer to the question of prior art, particularly for those who are new to the patent field. We can start off with the understanding that a particular reference or piece of knowledge will be considered to be prior art that must be overcome by a patent applicant if the patent examiner is legally allowed to use it against the applicant to reject one or more claims in a pending application. Likewise, a reference or piece of knowledge will be prior art if it can legally be used to invalidate one or more claims of an issued patent during litigation.

The trouble with explaining what prior art is stems from the fact that everyone already thinks they know what it is. Conceptually we do not want to issue patents for inventions that are not considered new, which seems fair enough. The trouble is defining what is “new.” For now, let’s just say that prior art must be a reference of some type (i.e., a patent or a printed publication) or some type of knowledge or event (i.e., public knowledge, public use or a sale of a product) that demonstrates that the invention in question is not new. (more…)

The Role for Open Source in Paradigm Shifting Innovation

Written by Gene Quinn (of IPWatchdog and Practice Center Contributor)

My writings about open source and software patents have earned me a special place in the hearts and minds of those who harbor irrational hatred of software patents. But I am here to tell you that open source is not all bad and, in fact, should be embraced. Open source, however, is hardly something new to the patent community. Perhaps it is better to say that where open source software is heading is nothing new, and it will come as a shock to those who hate patents, but patents will be completely necessary in order for the open source community to continue to advance and live up to its full potential.

Of course, many in the open source community simply do not want patents and would rather they go away altogether. They choose to believe that “innovation” is synonymous with “independent creation,” which is just straight up intellectually dishonest. In order to innovate one must create a new device or a new process. Simply stated, copying the work of others is not innovative; and neither is ignoring what others have done and independently creating something with careless disregard of whether it is new or used. (more…)

Patent Reform: Fantasy or Reality?

Patent Reform is an issue that has plagued the patent community for quite some time.  Will it actually ever happen or is it eternally on hold?  Surprisingly, the Patent Office and it’s deficiencies have gotten some well deserved attention in the media and in Congress during the last week.  Will this attention actually result in Congressional action on Patent Reform during the fall term?  Two of our Practice Center Contributors, Scott Mckeown and Gene Quinn, have passed along articles discussing the recent events and what if anything it may mean for Patent Reform.

Economy Recovery Platform Paving The Way For Patent Reform?

Written by Scott Mckeown (partner at Oblon Spivak and our newest Practice Center Contributor)

With Congress on summer hiatus, and significant election uncertainty coming in the Fall, Patent Reform efforts are seemingly on hold (again). Still, last week, the USPTO was able to secure an additional $139 million in funding. H.R. 5874 permits the USPTO to retain $139 million in fees collected from patent applications and patent maintenance fees for fiscal year 2010 “salaries and expenses.”

Senator Leahy, a backer of S.515, in passing the new PTO funding bill took the opportunity to emphasize the importance of the this perenially pending legislation, noting that more needs to be done to modernize and improve our patent system, which is a crucial component of our economic recovery… This bill [the S. 515 manager’s amendment] will provide the legal structure we need to allow our inventors to flourish. It will improve our economy and create jobs without adding a penny to the deficit. (more…)