Featured Story

Patent Attorney, Bob Siminski, Scheduled for Pharma IPR Conference in India

Patent Attorney, Bob Siminski, Scheduled for Pharma IPR Conference in India

By • on January 27, 2012

January 31 – February 2 Harness Dickey attorney Robert Siminski will be attending the Pharma IPR conference in Mumbai, India – January 31.-Feb.2. The conference is intended to bring pharmaceutical patent attorneys together from all over the world to discuss issues relevant to the pharmaceutical industry.   You are invited to follow Mr.

No CommentsRead this story »

Patent Prosecution

USPTO Issues Nearly A Quarter Million Patents in 2011

USPTO Issues Nearly A Quarter Million Patents in 2011

By • on January 11, 2012

The USPTO issued a total of 247741 patents in 2011, more than any previous year. Of these, 224519 were utility patents. It is interesting to note that

No CommentsRead this story »

USPTO Issues 21356 Design Patents in 2011

USPTO Issues 21356 Design Patents in 2011

By • on January 11, 2012

The USPTO issued 21256 design patents in 2011, which is down slightly from 2010 (22799) continuing the downward trend since 2008 when issuances peaked

No CommentsRead this story »

HD Signals

ADAPTING TO PATENT REFORM

ADAPTING TO PATENT REFORM

By • on October 31, 2011

Patent “Reform” — the America Invents Act — which is being implemented over the next eighteen months, makes significant changes

No CommentsRead this story »

USPTO PROPOSES AMENDING RULE 1.56 TO DEFINE MATERIALITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THERASENSE

USPTO PROPOSES AMENDING RULE 1.56 TO DEFINE MATERIALITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THERASENSE

By • on July 26, 2011

On July 21, 2011 the USPTO published a notice of proposed rulemaking to amend Rule 56 (37 CFR §1.56) to define materiality in accordance with the Federal

No CommentsRead this story »

Trademarks

USPTO Issues 239346 Trademark Registrations on 2011

USPTO Issues 239346 Trademark Registrations on 2011

By • on January 11, 2012

The USPTO issued 239346 trademark registrations in 2011. The most active trademark classes are Class 9 – scientific and electronic apparatus (24,590);

No CommentsRead this story »

TTAB: Prompt Filing of Supplemental Response Cures Procedural Deficiency in Expert Disclosures

TTAB: Prompt Filing of Supplemental Response Cures Procedural Deficiency in Expert Disclosures

By • on May 4, 2011

TTAB: Prompt Filing of Supplemental Response Cures Procedural Deficiency in Expert Disclosures The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) held

No CommentsRead this story »

Featured

Robert Siminski, Contributing Author of The Innovation Superstar Workbook

Robert Siminski, Contributing Author of The Innovation Superstar Workbook

By • on November 23, 2011

Troy Attorney, Robert Siminski, was recently published as contributing author to The Innovation

No CommentsRead this story »

Bob Siminski Gets Insight from the Korean Patent Court

Bob Siminski Gets Insight from the Korean Patent Court

By • on November 4, 2011

Today I met with the Korean Patent Court (KPC), which is essentially equivalent to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC). Despite its

No CommentsRead this story »

Music Industry

Under Pressure: Jay-Z Sues Bo-Sox’ Big Papi For Trademark Infringement

Under Pressure: Jay-Z Sues Bo-Sox’ Big Papi For Trademark Infringement

By • on April 22, 2010

The music industry has butt heads with the sports world again.  See,

No CommentsRead this story »

Musical Instrument Patent Of The Week

Musical Instrument Patent Of The Week

By • on March 24, 2010

Week of March 8, 2010 United States Patent No: 7,674,969                Issue

No CommentsRead this story »

Licensing

Perfecting Security Interests in Intellectual Property Is Not a Perfect Process

Perfecting Security Interests in Intellectual Property Is Not a Perfect Process

By • on November 7, 2009

By Robert J. Lenihan, II and Allen E. Pittoors In 1962, Michigan slightly revised, and then adopted, the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC).  The UCC governs

No CommentsRead this story »

ITC

ITC: First Five Things to Do when You’ve Been Sued

ITC: First Five Things to Do when You’ve Been Sued

By • on May 23, 2009

So your company has just been sued in the ITC? Perhaps this is a result of a dispute with one of your competitors; or perhaps your company simply supplies

No CommentsRead this story »

Litigation

Incorporation by reference does not expand claim scope

Incorporation by reference does not expand claim scope

By • on April 27, 2011

In those heady days of yesteryear, when the patent filing fee was $35 and prior art was printed on crumbling paper, patent attorneys relished the word

1 CommentRead this story »

TiVo Inc. v. Echostar Corp.

TiVo Inc. v. Echostar Corp.

By • on April 25, 2011

En banc Federal Circuit Modifies Standard on Findings of Contempt Regarding Permanent Injunctions; $90 million sanctions ruling against EchoStar survives

No CommentsRead this story »

More Great Intellectual Property Law Topics

Bob Siminski Meets with The Supreme People’s Court in Asia

Today I had the privilege of meeting with five Justices of The Supreme People’s Court.  The Justices were very engaging and did a great job educating our group on procedural issues.  We discussed everything

No CommentsRead this post »

Bob Siminski’s First Meeting in Asia

This morning I met with a delegation of the State Intellectual Property Office led by Deputy Commissioner Yang Tiejun in Beijing.  He participated in a question and answer session covering various topics. 

No CommentsRead this post »

Patent Attorney, Bob Siminski, Scheduled for Asia Trip with IPO

From Oct. 29 – Nov.5 Harness Dickey attorney Robert (Bob) Siminski will a delegate of

No CommentsRead this post »

CyberSource v. Retail Decisions, Inc.

In CyberSource v. Retail Decisions, Inc., No. 2009-1358 (August 16, 2011), the Federal Circuit held that an Internet-related method claim and a “computer readable medium” claim both fail to recite

No CommentsRead this post »

The Cost of Sloppy Claim Drafting

In CBT Flint Partners, LLC v. Return Path, Inc., No. 2010-1202, -1203 (Fed. Cir. August 10, 2011), CBT appealed a district court’s judgment that a claim was invalid as indefinite.  The claim was for

No CommentsRead this post »

CAFC MYRIAD DECISION: This is Not a “Gene Patent” Case

The panel decision in AMP v. Myriad Genetics, written by Judge Lourie, contained law and fact rulings consistent with the  Amicus Brief submitted by HDP on behalf of Gilead Sciences, Inc., Biogenerator

No CommentsRead this post »