Patent searching is still a profession where there aren’t many formal educational opportunities, and learning generally comes with experience. However, no matter how skilled the searcher, the quality of the search is only as good as the coverage of the resources queried. Searchable full text patent collections are easy to come by if you’re interested […]
The European Patent Office (“EPO”) recently announced that most of its fees will increase by between 5 and 8 per cent from April 1, 2010. A summary of the new fees is shown here. What does this all mean to you? If you know that you want to enter the European regional phase of a […]
The therapeutic use of that substance cannot be patented because that use is a method of treatment of a human or animal body by surgery, therapy or diagnosis which is practiced on that human or animal body. Methods of treatment are regarded in Europe as not being capable of industrial application and are consequently not […]
The EPO Enlarged Board of Appeal handed down its decision relating to the interpretation of the exclusion for patentability under article 53(c) EPC “method for treatment of the human or animal body by surgery”. Questions were asked to the Enlarged Board in a case about a medical imaging method, whereby a contrast agent was injected […]
In its only decision of yesterday’s Snowmaggedon, the BPAI affirmed a Patent Examiner’s anticipation rejection, citing the Applicant’s attempt to claim a new benefit of an old process. Ex parte Satoshi Matsubara, et al. is a brief but attention-grabbing case illustrating the law surrounding the concept of inherency and claiming a new use or benefit […]
A fellow patent attorney (who wishes to remain anonymous) called my attention to a recent decision issued by Judge Sue L. Robinson of the Delaware District Court. Cancer Research Technology et al. v Barr Laboratories et al., D-Del, Civ. No. 07-457-SLR, January 26, 2010. Download CRT v Barr. I’m not a district court decision junkie: […]
As a direct consequence of overruling the affirmative duty of due care to avoid infringement upon learning of a patent, the Federal Circuit expressly instructed in Seagate that “there is no affirmative obligation to obtain [an] opinion of counsel.” In re Seagate Technology, 497 F.3d 1360, 1371 (Fed. Cir. 2007) (en banc), cert. denied, 128 […]
Those of you who regularly prosecute patents in Australia will be aware that Australia has a unique approach to inventive step/non-obviousness. Specifically, Australian law differs from international norms in two fairly notable ways: Firstly, not all prior art references are citable. Rather, in order to be citable, a prior art reference must firstly be shown […]
Served Up Daily
Editor-in-Chief Barista Stephen Jenei is a patent attorney and Owner of Jenei LLC. When not serving up patent chat over a steaming cup of java, he's handling a diverse intellectual property practice in the biotechnology, pharmaceutical and chemical fields. More info @ Jenei LLC
