Future of Fuel Cell Batteries Riding on Apple’s Latest Patent Applications

Apple’s product line remains popular as ever, especially with the anticipated release of the iPhone 5. Their products have been heavily protected as the company has remained quite litigious, prosecuting and defending its smartphone technology patents to the point where they are involved in IP litigation all over the world.

The news as of late has switched from Apple’s patent litigation to Apple’s patent applications. According to the International Business Times,

Apple has filed two patent applications related to Fuel Cell batteries, hoping to develop and launch technology that allows its devices including the iPhone, iPad tablet, and laptop computers like the MacBook go weeks without a battery charge. (more…)

Will Any Patent Application Be Better Off Under The America Invents Act?

The following analysis of the changes to 35 USC § 102 under the America Invents Act comes from Courtenay Brinckerhoff ,writer of PharmaPatents Blog and Partner at Foley & Lardner.  Brinckerhoff questions whether any patent application will be better off under the new law?

The changes to 35 USC § 102 embodied in the America Invents Act (AIA) take effect on March 16, 2013, under complicated effective date provisions. The general consensus seems to be that applicants should try to file new applications before the law changes, because (for example) applications filed under the new law will be subject to a broader definition of prior art and will lose the ability to swear behind certain prior art by proving an earlier date of invention. Moreover, patents granted from such applications will be subject to challenge under the new post-grant review provisions.In counseling clients on how to prepare for the impact of patent reform, I’ve been trying to identify situations where an application might be better off under the new law. So far, only one scenario comes to mind–an application threatened by an inventor-based disclosure that was made before a foreign priority date. (more…)

The Disharmonious Loss Of The Hilmer Doctrine

The following analysis of  the new 35 USC § 102(a)(2) provision in the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act eliminating the Hilmer doctrine and giving prior art effect to U.S. patent applications as of their foreign filing dates comes from Courtenay Brinckerhoff ,writer of PharmaPatents Blog and Partner at Foley & Lardner.

Here is an excerpt from the article originally published on Pharma Patents:

One of the many changes included in the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act relates to the date that a U.S. patent application is effective as prior art. While eliminating the Hilmer doctrine and giving prior art effect to U.S. patent applications as of their foreign priority dates might seem to be a step towards international harmonization, it actually may widen the gulf between the U.S. and the rest of world. (more…)

10 Mistakes That Will Kill Your Patent in Litigation & How To Avoid Them

Brandon Baum, of Baum Legal and Practice Center Contributor, will be speaking about litigation issues relevant to patent prosecution at PLI’s Fundamentals of Patent Prosecution 2011: A Boot Camp for Claim Drafting & Amendment Writing on July 8th in San Francisco.  Brandon shared with us an article he wrote for the Course Handbook entitled 10 Mistakes That Will Kill Your Patent in Litigation And How To Avoid Them. The following is an excerpt from the article:  

It is often said that hiring a litigator to draft a contract results in an iron‐clad contract that no one will ever sign. That’s because litigators learn by seeing how things can go wrong, and shoring things up to prevent that scenario from recurring in the future. We typically get involved when reasonable minds have failed to agree – the joint venture has gone south, the software didn’t perform, or the parties disagree over the scope or value of patented technology. Thus, we have developed a treasure trove of anecdotal evidence of what not to do and we live by the motto “learn from the mistakes of others, as you may not live long enough to make them all yourself.”1


Patent Claim Writing: Insight Into The Drafting Process

Last week, I attended PLI’s Fundamentals of Patent Prosecution 2010 Program: A Boot Camp for Claim Drafting and Amendment Writing in New York City.  I was fortunate to hear an elite panel of experienced patent prosecutors  talk about critical patent application topics.

Amongst the group, was Robert Faber, partner at Ostrolenk Faber LLP and one of our Practice Center Contributors.  He spoke about claim drafting and gave some valuable tips as to how to write a well written claim.  Faber said, ” you want to protect the invention in a claim such that you cover the concept the inventor has in mind and no matter how the particular concept  is executed in years to come.”  Faber advises that you should always describe the concept as broad as possible.

Below is an article Faber passed along, “Patent Claim Writing“, that helps us understand the basics of claim drafting, using a simple example:

United States Patents serve the important national goal of encouraging developments in the useful arts and sciences by granting inventors and their assignees patents that afford a limited time monopoly in their inventions in exchange for their disclosing the invention and how to practice it to the public.  In the patent document, patent practitioners and patent owners= attorneys try to adequately disclose the invention and at least the best mode of practicing the invention sufficiently to enable persons skilled in the art to themselves practice the invention without undue experimentation. 35 U.S.C. ‘ 112, para. 1.  That is the minimal disclosure that must be provided. (more…)