Blog

Patent Application Practice provides the most thorough and effective treatment of patent application preparation and prosecution. This single-volume desk reference was written for patent attorneys who are preparing and prosecuting patents before the PTO.

One should understand the basics of how to determine whether an item infringes a design patent.

An intellectual property holding company, established by a parent company, owns intellectual property used by the parent company. The intellectual property holding company licenses the rights to operating companies. The holding company thus receives royalties from its licensee(s). This arrangement may be beneficial to mitigate risk to the parent company and seek preferential situations for taxes imposed on royalty income.

By following these tips, you can increase your chances of getting a patent for your invention and protecting your intellectual property.

A plant patent is a type of intellectual property protection that is granted to the inventor of a new and distinct variety of plant, governed by 35 U.S.C. § 161. To obtain a plant patent, you apply with the USPTO. The application includes a plant description and drawings of the plant. You also pay a filing fee. The USPTO will review your application and determine if it meets all of the requirements for plant patent protection. If your application is approved, you will be issued a plant patent.

Showing a lack of enablement can be a complex and challenging task. However, if you can successfully invalidate a patent, you may be able to avoid infringement liability. If you are accused of infringing a patent, speaking with an experienced patent attorney is important to discuss your options.

The Doctrine of Equivalents allows infringement to be found in some cases where the elements of the accused device are substantially equivalent to the corresponding elements of the asserted claim. K-2 Corp. v. Salomon S.A., 191 F.3d 1356, 1366, 52 USPQ2d 1001 (Fed. Cir. 1999). The Doctrine of Equivalents prevents an accused infringer from avoiding infringement by changing only minor or insubstantial details of a claimed invention while retaining the essential functionality of each of those details. Thus, a device that does not literally infringe a claim may nonetheless infringe under the Doctrine of Equivalents if every limitation in the claim is literally or equivalently present in the accused device or method. Warner-Jenkinson Co. v. Hilton Davis Chem. Co., 41 USPQ2d 1865, 1876 (1997). This “all elements” rule of the Doctrine of Equivalents requires that an alleged infringing device have an identical or equivalent element for each limitation contained in the claim of the alleged infringed patent. Loral Fairchild Corp. v. Sony Corp., 50 USPQ2d 1865, 181 F.3d 1313, 1327.

Invalidating a U.S. patent can be a complex and challenging process, and it typically requires a legal proceeding before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) or a court. It is important to note that invalidating a patent is a complex and technical process. It is important to consult with an attorney if you are considering invalidating a patent.

Patent searching can be a complex process, but it is an essential part of the patent process. By following these steps, you can increase your chances of finding the information that you need.

Much information can be deduced by searching for published patent applications and issued patents citing your own published patent applications and issued patents, domestically and internationally. I list here the type of information that you may find by searching for such "forward citations" of your patents.