This guidance merely assures that #swpats (which courts reject!) can more easily slip in... in error/by accident. IOW, #iancu is devaluing US #patents by obliterating perception of presumption of validity. What a reckless Trumpster.
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s new guidance to examiners on how computer-related patent applications must be written to avoid being rejected as indefinite shows that the office is paying close attention to an area of the law that has been murky, attorneys say.
"Federal Circuit held that the patent claims are an abstract idea and merely require the conventional manipulation of information by a computer." #swpats are still dead... in US courts... ignore the @uspto circus clown #iancu
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office will be offering the next webinar in its Patent Quality Chat webinar series from 2:00 to 3:00 pm (ET) on January 10, 2019. In the latest webinar, on the "Revised Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance," USPTO Deputy Commissioner for Patent Examination Policy Bob Bahr and Senior Legal Advisor Matthew Sked will discuss the revised guidance and the changes it makes to how USPTO personnel apply the first step of the Supreme Court's Alice/Mayo test (Step 2A in Office guidance) for subject matter eligibility, and specifically, how the revised guidance creates a new inquiry in Step...
By Michael Borella -- On January 4, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office published updated examination guidance regarding the subject matter eligibility of inventions involving abstract ideas. The guidance went into effect on January 7, upon its publication in the Federal Register. In substance, the new guidance falls in line with statements made previously by USPTO Director Andrei Iancu. But at first blush, it does not appear to be a radical departure from substantive USPTO examination practice despite raising a few additional procedural hurdles that examiners are to overcome before rejecting claims under 35 U.S.C. § 101. Further, the guidance...
In defiance of courts’ rejection of #softwarepatents , the Trump-appointed Director #iancu (whose firm had worked for #Trump before the appointment) metaphorically sticks up his middle finger and ignores judge
With patent trolls' bankruptcy filings, advocates' departures and a decline in the number of granted US patents we're seeing a sort of recession if not depression in the patent microcosm; that being the case, we'll shift our focus to other things in 2019
The patent maximalists are celebrating overgranting; the USPTO, failing to heed the warning from patent courts, continues issuing far too many patents and a new paper from Mark Lemley and Robin Feldman offers a dose of sobering reality
With the shift away from the Eastern District of Texas (EDTX) and with PTAB applying growing levels of scrutiny to patents the likelihood that abstract patents will endure at the patent office or the courts is greatly diminished
35 U.S.C. § 101 does not seem to matter to people whose living is made from litigation and patent pursuits on (or pertaining to) algorithms; we rebut a few examples from the past week, reminding readers that lawyers aren't credible advisors on issues they stand to gain from (at clients' and innocent
Tony Scardino continues to push for Pam Isom as the CIO according to sources. This is a grave mistake, Isom is completely clueless when it comes to IT. She spent half a billion and delivered nothing. Scardino just wants a puppet CIO. Hopefully the new Dir will hire outside.
The patent microcosm together with Andrei Iancu (who himself came from the patent microcosm) is frustrated to have come to grips with quality control; low-quality patents continue to be rejected by courts
The US patent office, which ultimately profits from patent maximalism, is being given too much power/leverage over the laws/policy which govern its operations, enabling the Trump-connected new chief to implement rollbacks which would harm patent quality and empower patent trolls
The stupidity of the patent microcosm, which would like to see everything in the world patented and which would gleefully smear or even sue its critics (the EFF was sued several times for libel over its "Stupid Patent of the Month" series)
As one might expect, people who profit from patent litigation are trying to stop or at least curtail/slow down the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), whose primary function is preventing frivolous patent lawsuits by annulling improperly-granted patents (typically those that are actively being use
The agenda of patent trolls, who are hoping to make Oil States go away, is well served by patent lawyers, who keep bringing up far less important (and far older) cases whose outcome better suited their financial interests
The Donald Trump-nominated and appointed USPTO chief turns out to be the disaster he was expected to be considering the fact that he came from the patent microcosm (from a firm that used to work directly for Trump)
Got a pretty big story about #epo coming up. Over the weekend, however, #swpats and #uspto will be in focus. #iancu really lets down tech companies in order to help #patenttrolls and law firms (which he came from). @uspto
By James Korenchan -- At the U.S. Chamber of Commerce Patent Policy Conference last month, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) Director Andrei Iancu (at right) gave a keynote address on the role of U.S. patent policy in domestic innovation and the potential impacts on investment towards the advancement of science and technology. The primary goals of the address was to address the results of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's 5th annual study on worldwide intellectual property systems. The study dropped the U.S. patent system to 13th in the world, thereby extending the U.S.'s decline since 2016 (in 2016, the...
By Andrew Williams -- The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office published a notice of proposed Rulemaking in the Federal Register (83 Fed. Reg. 21221) today which would provide a change to the claim construction standard used in Inter Partes Reviews (IPRs), Post-Grant Proceedings (PGRs), and Covered Business Method Reviews (CBMs). Instead of the broadest reasonable interpretation ("BRI") standard originally adopted, and blessed by the Supreme Court in Cuozzo Speed Technologies LLC v. Lee, the proposed rulemaking would adopt the same standard used by district courts and the ITC. The use of a harmonized standard has been long advocated by patent...
With the Supreme Court approving the actions of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, i.e. lending even more legitimacy to Inter Partes Reviews (IPRs), responses are expected to be either silence, personal attacks, or distraction tactics
Serving patent trolls for the most part (nefarious actors that dodge the courts by going after defenseless individuals and/or companies), the US patent office still hands out software patents and law firms -- in addition to their front groups like IPO, IPLAC and AIPLA -- try to urge the US Patent an