//
archives

Inventive step and non-obviousness

This tag is associated with 7 posts

The Nonobviousness Doctrine As An Innovation Tax

As the great patent reform debate rages, all participants basically agree that the patent office moves too slowly, is underfunded, and reform is needed.  That’s pretty much where the agreement ends.  Supporters of current reform efforts believe that awarding patents to the first person to invent is too unpredictable.  Groups that opposing the current reforms … Continue reading

Banks Buy Another Patent Reform Amendment

UPDATE: LINKS FIXED Yesterday, the Senate made further modifications to S.23, now called America Invents Act, which present a slight gain from what the bill originally represented. Unfortunately, the insidious and problematic ‘first-to-file’ provisions remain, and yet another amendment bought and paid for by the financial industry.  While FTF has its supporters, including the AIPLA, … Continue reading

This Blog States The Obvious

Obviously, things that are obvious shouldn’t be patentable. Obvious improvements aren’t worthy of patents, instead being reserved for inventors who possess extra-ordinary skill, not merely every Tom, Dick and Harry to come up with something new … Unfortunately, figuring out how to actually prove something obvious has plagued the patent system for centuries. Engineering is … Continue reading

A Patent Obituary – A Belated Farewell To Engelgau ‘565

More than one year ago, the world lost what remained of US Patent 6,237,565. Conceived in 1999, the ‘565 had yet to know the impact it would have on the word, nor the fact that it would become known simply as “The Teleflex Patent.”  We don’t know whether the hundreds of siblings ever felt overshadowed … Continue reading

Statutory Bar Prior Art – Looking For A Test Case

In today’s article, Statutory Bar Prior Art in the Nonobviousness Analysis, Dennis Crouch asks whether anyone has a test case that might test applicability of 102(b), post invention prior art in a 103(a) obviousness analysis.  The problem, according to Prof Crouch: A plain reading of the statute that considers the obviousness of an invention “at the … Continue reading

A Patently Obvious Reading of the Recent Examination Guidelines

“The USPTO Decides to Lower Obviousness Standards” proclaims Slashdot.  Yes, according to Slashdot these new guidelines (which actually went into effect in September, and thoroughly debated over at PatentlyO) “do away with” the old 2007 standards which said that predictable variations based on design incentives, and use of known techniques to improve similar devices.  Mike … Continue reading

Cry, Cry Again?

Other than Perfect Web Technologies, no one is going to cry over the invalidation of patent no. 6,631,400.  The ‘400 Patent claims: 1. A method for managing bulk e-mail distribution comprising the steps: (A) matching a target recipient profile with a group of target recipients; (B) transmitting a set of bulk e-mails to said target … Continue reading