This is a patent attorney blog focusing with posts directed towards helping people understand the patent process and also with tips for helping patent attorneys

An Austin Patent Attorney’s Review of Superior Industries V. Thor Global

OVERVIEW: This is an interesting case that deals with several different components of intellectual property law including: patents, trademarks, and civil procedure. Prior to the court of appeals ruling for this case, the district court of Minnesota dismissed this case based on claim preclusion reasoning that Superior’s prior trademark action raised from the same operative [...]

By |2012-11-27T17:04:30-06:00November 27th, 2012|Blog, Patent Attorney Takeaways|Comments Off on An Austin Patent Attorney’s Review of Superior Industries V. Thor Global

Quantity of Mobile Patent Applications Make Patent Searches Inefficient

I recently read an interesting article (http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20121116-phone-patents-an-absurd-battle/print) regarding just how many mobile device patent applications there currently are, and difficulty that the quantity of mobile patent applications create. The article estimates that there are about ¼ of a million active patents in the united states that have relevance to the mobile applications.  The article further [...]

By |2012-11-26T22:07:17-06:00November 26th, 2012|Blog|Comments Off on Quantity of Mobile Patent Applications Make Patent Searches Inefficient

RITZ CAMERA v. SANDISK CORP, Antitrust and Patent Law

OVERVIEW: This case deals with the limits on standing to bring a Walker Process antitrust lawsuit. A Walker Process antitrust lawsuit can be brought when a party procured a patent through intentional fraud, and uses the patent to create a monopoly on the patented technology. The question in this case is directed towards whether a [...]

By |2012-11-20T14:46:17-06:00November 20th, 2012|Blog|Comments Off on RITZ CAMERA v. SANDISK CORP, Antitrust and Patent Law

Will my prototype infringe on a patent if it includes patented elements?

A common question I get as a patent attorney located in Austin, Tx, is "will my prototype infringe on a patent, trademark, or copyright if it includes patented/trademarked/copyrighted elements?" This question arises when inventors create prototypes that includes elements that have already been patented/trademarked/copyrighted.  For example, if an inventor’s invention is directed towards a more [...]

By |2012-11-15T16:41:06-06:00November 15th, 2012|Blog, Copyright Basics, Patent Basics, Trademark Basics|Comments Off on Will my prototype infringe on a patent if it includes patented elements?

Who does the America Invents Act favor large companies or start-ups?

Does the American Invents Act that goes into effect in spring 2013 favor large companies or start-ups/inventors? The most crucial consequence of the America Invents Act is that the United States is moving from a first to invent rule (current US standard) to a first to file rule (current standard everywhere else).  Essentially, this act [...]

By |2012-11-13T15:52:31-06:00November 13th, 2012|Blog|Comments Off on Who does the America Invents Act favor large companies or start-ups?

An Austin Patent Attorney’s Review of EDWARDS LIFESCIENCES v. COREVALVE

This is case review discusses 1) standard of enablement and 2) standard for injunctions against future infringement. CASE OVERVIEW: Edwards Lifesciences (“Edwards”) sued defendants Corevalue for infringement of US patent No 5,411,552 (“’552 patent”).  The 552 patent is directed towards a prosthetic device for a heart valve, where the valve is mounted on a stent [...]

By |2012-11-13T14:35:03-06:00November 13th, 2012|Blog, Patent Attorney Takeaways|Comments Off on An Austin Patent Attorney’s Review of EDWARDS LIFESCIENCES v. COREVALVE

An Austin Patent Attorney’s Initial Thoughts on SurfCast v. Microsoft

Overview: Microsoft was recently sued by Surfcast under the theory of patent infringement based on the new tile layout of window 8 devices. Below is one of the claims likely to be in question during litigation, and my initial thoughts as a patent attorney regarding the case. Representative claim: 1. A method executed by a [...]

By |2012-11-21T18:47:16-06:00November 1st, 2012|Blog|Comments Off on An Austin Patent Attorney’s Initial Thoughts on SurfCast v. Microsoft

“What is the standard required for patentability if I am combining a couple of elements from different inventions to create something better?”

Many inventions that are created are combinations of elements that are already in the public domain. I question that I frequently get asked, is “What is the standard required for patentability if I am combining a couple of elements from different inventions to create something better?” This blog post by an Austin, TX Patent Attorney [...]

By |2012-10-30T14:36:18-05:00October 30th, 2012|Blog, Patent Basics|Comments Off on “What is the standard required for patentability if I am combining a couple of elements from different inventions to create something better?”

Five reasons why clear and detailed figures are critical for a good patent.

1) It is important to include figures detailing each and every novel feature of your invention. As a patent attorney, inventors who have created a mechanical invention will typically only provide me with a couple of figures detailing only the most specific features of their invention without taking into considerations different ways a product could [...]

By |2012-10-29T11:41:14-05:00October 29th, 2012|Blog, Patent Basics|Comments Off on Five reasons why clear and detailed figures are critical for a good patent.

Mayo v. Prometheus

The following is an Austin, Texas patent attorney’s overview of Mayo v. Prometheus, and learning lessons for patent attorneys. BRIEF OVERVIEW: Claim 1 of Prometheus’ 6,355,623 patent which is in question in this case, recited: A method of optimizing therapeutic efficacy for treatment of an immune-mediated gastrointestinal disorder, comprising: (a) administering a drug providing 6-thioguanine [...]

By |2012-10-28T23:07:27-05:00October 28th, 2012|Blog, Patent Attorney Takeaways|Comments Off on Mayo v. Prometheus
Go to Top