//
archives

Patrick

Patrick has written 343 posts for Gametime IP

False Narrative Credibility For Sale?

In the wake of yet another “academic” pushing a false narrative without proper facts, comes a story about Google attempting to influence academic publishing through payments of as much as $400,000 USD per article. These types of stories are typically filled with meaningless platitudes like “There are lots of patents floating around that don’t represent … Continue reading

NPEs Under Fire for Attorney Fees

A few of recent cases of interest to patent owners deal with attorney’s fees under 35 USC § 285. First, Rothschild Connected Devices is notable because the CAFC instructed the trial court to order payment of fees despite the fact that the patent owner withdrew its complaint within the 21-day safe harbor period under Rule … Continue reading

Rhetoric vs. Results – A Breakdown of Unified Patents Challenges

Two of my recent IPWire posts have addressed frequent patent challenger Unified Patents, and their self-appointed mission to profit from the destruction of intellectual property. The first post, in June, exposed Unified Patents IPR results and compared them against IPR petitioner’s at large. As it turns out, only about 1/3 of Unified’s IPRs are actually … Continue reading

Patent Enforcers Anonymous?

Hi, I’m Patrick. <pauses> I find patents that companies infringe and help enforce the patent rights against those companies … Over at IPWire, I recently posted a very personal story prompted by some very negative comments that were lobbed at me and those in my business. I felt it was time to explain (not that it should … Continue reading

Trademarks are “Private” Speech Under Matal v. Tam, and Patents are Private Property

In finding trademark registration to be “private,” rather than “government” speech, the Supreme Court forged a path toward finding Inter Partes Review unconstitutional in the upcoming Oil States case. Specifically, the Court unanimously agreed that the federal trademark registration system is predicated on ancient, historical rights similar to the historical justification of patent rights. Additionally, … Continue reading

Deconstructing the Patent Troll Myth: A Series

Over on IPWire, I’ve posted the first three of what I expect to be a recurring theme deconstructing the patent troll narrative. Part 1 examines the lynchpin of the entire narrative: the popularized denial of property status for patents. This article points to copious academic research incontrovertibly demonstrating that patents always were, and are, intended … Continue reading

Follow Me on IPWire

While a briefly-attempted revival from this blog late last year was largely unsuccessful, for the past few months I have been blogging over at IPWire. If you want more frequent updates, please head on over there and click the “subscribe” button for regular updates on new content. In addition to my posts, you’ll find the … Continue reading

CAFC Fails to Enhance District Court Review

In the 1990’s, Peter Andrulis and Murray Drulak discovered that thalidomide,* combined with an alkylating agent such as melphalan, could be effective in treating certain types of cancer.  US Patent 6,140,346 subsequently issued, including the following claim which the eponymous Andrulis Pharmaceuticals asserted against thalidomide manufacturer Celgene. Earlier this week, the CAFC brought an end to that … Continue reading

Raymond P Niro, 1942-2016

I know I am very, very late in mentioning the passing of one of the truly remarkable legends in the patent field, but I did also want to join my colleagues in remembering and commemorating the life of Ray Niro. I only met him a few times, but his magnetic personality left an indelible impression … Continue reading

Google Lawsuit Reveals Patent Monetization Strategies Of BT And Goldman Sachs

Suffolk Technologies, a Delaware LLC, accused AOL and Google of infringing patents–including US Patent 6,081,835–through the use of Google AdWords and AdSense.  A lawsuit filed in June 2012 explained that the patents originated at British Telecom (BT), and a series of simultaneously recorded assignments shows the patents subsequently assigned to IPValue and then Suffolk.  According to an … Continue reading