Section » Featured

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 »

More Articles

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); Class 16 – printed matter (9692); Class 25 – clothing (14,355). The most active service mark classes are Class 35 – advertising and business (26,542);

No CommentsRead this story »

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 Superstar Workbook. Robert joined together with author, Nicholas Webb, to write this book focused on innovation. Nicholas Webb describes his book: “The

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 name, the KPC has jurisdiction over a wide variety of intellectual property matters, including copyrights, trademarks, and trade secrets, for example. The

No CommentsRead this story »

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

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

By • on November 1, 2011

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 from injunctive relief to evidentiary considerations. The Justices were asked why there appears

No CommentsRead this story »

Bob Siminski’s First Meeting in Asia

Bob Siminski’s First Meeting in Asia

By • on October 31, 2011

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.  Some of the more interesting questions and answers were as follows: Q:           Due

No CommentsRead this story »

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

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

By • on October 21, 2011

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

No CommentsRead this story »

CyberSource v. Retail Decisions, Inc.

CyberSource v. Retail Decisions, Inc.

By • on August 22, 2011

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 patent-eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101, potentially calling into question the validity

No CommentsRead this story »

The Cost of Sloppy Claim Drafting

The Cost of Sloppy Claim Drafting

By • on August 18, 2011

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 an apparatus comprising a network computer “programmed to detect analyze the electronic mail communication

No CommentsRead this story »

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

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

By • on August 11, 2011

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 and Elan Pharmaceuticals, Inc.   The CAFC held that a synthetic cDNA construct is patent-eligible

No CommentsRead this story »