Sep 02

INTERNET SIGHTINGS – August / September 2019

Internet Sightings by Frederic M. Douglas and James E. Hawes

This column highlights some of the more notable recent online notices, newsletters, and blogs dealing with IP prosecution issues.

 

IPWatchdog – a patent law blog – IPwatchdog.com

  • On August 12, 2019, a post reviewed the Federal Circuit opinion in Quake v. Lo, Nos. 2018-1779, 2018-1780, 2018-1782, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 20407 (Fed. Cir., July 10, 2019) (https://www.leagle.com/decision/infco20190710121) which announced that the written description requirement under 35 U.S.C. § 112 is not satisfied if the entire claimed method is not described by the specification. (https://www.ipwatchdog.com/2019/08/12/claimed-method-whole-must-described-satisfy-written-description-requirement/id=112056).

 

  • In the August 13, 2019 post news comes that Section 101 rejections have decreased across computer-related art units since the USPTO issued its 2019 revised eligibility guidance (https://www.ipwatchdog.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/revised-101-guidance-2018-28282.pdf). (https://www.ipwatchdog.com/2019/08/13/update-101-rejections-uspto-prospects-computer-related-applications-continue-improve-post-guidance/id=112132/).

 

Patently-O – a blog written by Dennis Crouch – www.patentlyo.com.

  • In his July 24, 2019 post, Professor Dennis Crouch discussed the interplay between experimental data and proving sufficient written description in the context of Nuvo Pharmaceuticals v. Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories Inc., No. 17-02473, Petition for Rehearing En Banc (Fed. Cir., June 14, 2019) (https://cdn.patentlyo.com/media/2019/07/NuvoEnBancPetition.pdf) (https://patentlyo.com/patent/2019/07/proving-description-experimental.html).

 

  • In a July 30, 2019 post, Jason Rantanen discussed Solutran, Inc. v. Evalon, Inc., No. 2019-1345, 2019-1460 (Fed. Cir., July 30, 2019) (https://cdn.patentlyo.com/media/2019/07/19-1345.Opinion.7-30-2019.pdf) wherein the Federal Circuit reversed the district court, holding that claims directed towards an abstract idea, despite the involvement of handling paper checks in a computer-related method claim (https://patentlyo.com/patent/2019/07/solutran-processing-eligible.html#more-27438).

 

  • In his August 20, 2019 post, Professor Dennis Crouch discussed a non-precedential decision affirming a finding that claims to a “customization module” is a means-plus-function element that is indefinite if no algorithm is disclosed Grecia v. Samsung Electronics America, Inc., No. 2019-1019, (Fed. Cir., August 20, 2019) (http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/opinions-orders/19-1019.Opinion.8-20-2019.pdf) (https://patentlyo.com/patent/2019/08/customization-indefinite-disclosed.html).

 

AIPLA – the profession’s national organization – see AIPLA.org

  • AIPLA will hold its 2019 Annual Meeting October 24-26, 2019 in Washington, D.C. More information on this meeting and other events is available at https://www.aipla.org/home/meetings-education/upcoming-events/expand/2019-annual-meeting.

 

For more information about any of the patent topics mentioned consult Patent Application Practice. Trademark topics are discussed in Trademark Registration Practice. Both are published by West and updated twice a year. For patent prosecution or litigation questions, contact Fred Douglas at 949/293-0442 or by email at fdouglas@cox.net.