Filewrapper

Copyright Office Proposes New Fee Schedule

By

The Copyright Office recently announced a new proposed fee schedule that would increase the majority of fees associated with filings at the Copyright Office. The proposal comes after an extensive assessment performed by consultants Booz Allen Hamilton. The proposed fee increase would help the Copyright Office offset regular costs, while also providing the Copyright Office […]

Continue Reading →

Farm Bill Amendments to Enable CBD Oil and Hemp Industry

By Cassie J. Edgar

On June 27th, the Senate published the latest version of amendments to the Farm Bill which contain updates to the regulatory framework for hemp and derived products including CBD (cannabidiol) oil. Cannabidiol oil has documented health benefits such as effectiveness in treating certain types of seizures, and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services […]

Continue Reading →

ZERO-ing in on the Right Legal Test for Genericness

By Blog Staff

In Royal Crown Co. v. The Coca-Cola Co., the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) vacated a decision of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) dismissing Royal Crown’s opposition to the registration of Coca-Cola’s trademarks for soft drinks and sports drinks with the term ZERO. The CAFC concluded that the […]

Continue Reading →

Is your Confidential Sale Prior Art Against You? The Supreme Court has Decided to Weigh In.

You have a new idea and have found an interested buyer. If you sell your product or process to the buyer prior to filing a patent application, have you created your own prior art? If it is prior art, it would bar a later filed patent under 35 USC §102. Prior to the change in […]

Continue Reading →

U.S. Patent Number 10 Million

By Kirk M. Hartung

Last week, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) reached a new milestone, with issuance of patent number 10 million. This patent is entitled Coherent LADAR Using Intra-Pixel Quadrature Detection, and relates to a laser detection system for various industries, such as medical imaging and autonomous vehicles. The patent is owned by Raytheon Company, of […]

Continue Reading →

Patent Rights are NOT Monopoly Rights

By Luke T. Mohrhauser

There has been a long believed and conveyed statement that patent rights provide a “legal monopoly”. While this may be a simple way to explain the rights held by one issued patent, this is simply not true. Monopolies, at their core, attempt to control a market or an aspect of a market. Patents provide protection […]

Continue Reading →

Protecting Your Nanotechnology Inventions – Part 1: Defining Your Space

By Jonathan L. Kennedy

In a recent post, I discussed the increasing focus on nanotechnology research including the growing number of patents issued and government funding in nanotechnology research. Obtaining the strongest and broadest protection for your nanotechnology should be a focus of any research and intellectual property (IP) strategy. There are things that can be done during research […]

Continue Reading →

Federal Circuit Defines “manufactured” Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1498

By Blog Staff

In FastShip, LLC v. United States, decided on June 5, 2018, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) defined the term “manufactured” pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1498. The statute states that a patent owner can sue the U.S. government for infringement when “an invention [covered by a U.S. patent] is […]

Continue Reading →

A Commentary on Women in the Profession and MVS

By Heidi Sease Nebel

A recent article appeared in the Lexis Nexis news piece “Law360”, describing the dismal results of their annual “Glass Ceiling Report”. The article concluded that there had been “limited progress” for female attorneys in a male-dominated profession. Women have represented over 40% of law school students for decades, according to the American Bar Association, yet, […]

Continue Reading →

PTAB to Consider When Conference Materials are Prior Art

By Blog Staff

In a consolidated appeal from two related Patent Trial and Appeals Board (“PTAB”) decisions, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) affirmed-in-part and vacated-in-part the PTAB’s findings. The CAFC affirmed the PTAB’s conclusion that challenged claims would not have been obvious over two specific references. However, the CAFC vacated the PTAB’s determination that […]

Continue Reading →

Stay in Touch

Receive the latest news and updates from us and our attorneys.

Sign Up