Patent management

December 31, 2007

Patent, European Patent Bulletin

Filed under: Uncategorized — Tags: , — admin @ 7:38 pm

The European Patent Bulletin is a weekly trilingual publication of the European Patent Office (EPO), generally issued every Wednesday. <ref> European Patent Office web site, Publication dates for 2006, retrieved on July 7, 2006 </ref> It contains “entries made in the Register of European Patents, as well as other particulars the publication of which is prescribed by [the European Patent Convention (EPC)] or its implementation”. <ref> </ref>

The European Patent Bulletin is published in German, English and French, the three official languages of the EPO. <ref> </ref> The three texts coexist in the same issue of the bulletin. The European Patent Bulletin has been published online since January 2004.

Contents


Legal effect of mentions in the European Patent Bulletin

In the European patent grant procedure, the mention of the publication of the European search report in the European Patent Bulletin marks the start of the six-month period for filing the request for examination, paying the examination fee <ref> </ref>, paying the designation fees, <ref> </ref> and paying the extension fees. <ref> Ancillary Regulations to the European Patent Convention, Extension of European patents, see [1] [2]
[3] [4]
[5]
[6] [7] </ref>

At the end of the grant procedure, the decision to grant a European patent takes legal effect only from the day when the European Patent Bulletin mentions the grant. <ref> </ref> The publication of this mention in the European Patent Bulletin marks the start of the three-month period (or more in some countries, such as Ireland) for supplying the translation of the text in which the European patent has been granted to each national patent office, in order to have an effective protection in each country. <ref name=”Art65″> </ref> The publication of this mention also marks the start of the nine-month period for giving notice of opposition to the patent to the EPO. <ref> </ref>

During the opposition procedure, when the European patent is maintained in an amended form, the publication of the mention of maintenance of the European patent in the European Patent Bulletin marks the start of the three-month period (or more in some countries, such as Ireland) for supplying the translation of the text in which the European patent has been maintained to each national patent office, in order to have an effective protection in each country. <ref name=”Art65″/>


References

<references/>


See also

  • Official Journal of the European Patent Office
  • Register of European Patents
  • PCT Gazette
  • List of intellectual property law journals


External links

  • European Patent Bulletin, recent issues on the EPO web site
  • European Patent Bulletin, archives since January 2, 2004 on the EPO web site
  • Relevant notices in the Official Journal
    • Changes in the European Patent Bulletin, OJ 1983, 459 [8]
    • Amendments and additions to the European Patent Bulletin, OJ 1986, 63 [9]
    • Amendments and additions to the European Patent Bulletin, OJ 1988, 37 [10]

References

Germany:, Association of Free Democrats

Filed under: Uncategorized — Tags: , — admin @ 6:37 pm

The Association of Free Democrats (German: Bund Freier Demokraten) was a liberal coalition formed in East Germany on 12 February, 1990. It originally consisted of the Liberal Democratic Party, the Free Democratic Party (GDR) and the German Forum Party. In the Volkskammer election of the 18 March, 1990 the Association of Free Democrats polled 5.28% of the votes and gained 21 seats. It then participated in the last GDR government led by Lothar de Maizière.

In 27 March, 1990 the Association of Free Democrats absorbed the National Democratic Party of Germany. Finally, in 11 August, 1990 it merged with the West German Free Democratic Party.


See also

  • Liberalism
  • Contributions to liberal theory
  • Liberalism worldwide
  • List of liberal parties
  • Liberal democracy
  • Liberalism in Germany


External links

  • Association of Free Democrats from chronik der wende

References

Patent, Kokai

Filed under: Uncategorized — Tags: — admin @ 2:54 pm

The kokai or kokai tokkyo koho is the name given to the published, unexamined Japanese patent application, as opposed to the kokoku or tokkyo koho, the examined and approved Japanese patent application. Kokai means “open to the public”, “laid-open”. Kokai are published eighteen months after the earliest priority date.


See also

  • Japanese patent law

References

Patent application, State of the art

Filed under: Uncategorized — admin @ 2:22 pm

The state of the art is the highest level of development, as of a device, technique, or scientific field, achieved at a particular time.

Contents


Usage note

The phrase “state of the art” should be hyphenated when it is used as an adjective, e.g.:

“This machine is an example of state-of-the-art technology”,

but not when used as a noun, as in the following sentence:

“The state of the art in this field is mostly related to the X technology”.

Cutting edge as a synonym of the term can be used as a noun.


Origin

The earliest known usage of the term “state of the art” dates back to 1910 from an engineering manual by H.H. Suplee titled Gas Turbine. It reads, “In the present state of the art this is all that can be done.”


Patent law

In the context of the European and Australian patent law, the term “state of the art” is a concept used in the process of assessing and asserting novelty and inventive step, <ref> Under the European Patent Convention: and . </ref> and is a synonym of the expression “prior art”. In the European Patent Convention (EPC), “[the] state of the art shall be held to comprise everything made available to the public by means of a written or oral description, by use, or in any other way, before the date of filing of the European patent application” according to . Due account should be taken of as well, but merely for the examination of novelty.

The expression “background art” is also used in certain legal provisions, such as , and has the same meaning. <ref> Decision T 11/82 of 15 April 1983 of the Boards of Appeal of the European Patent Office </ref>


References

<references/>


See also

  • High end
  • Bleeding edge

References

The patents and, Julius Edgar Lilienfeld

Filed under: Uncategorized — admin @ 4:20 am

Julius Edgar Lilienfeld (April 18, 1881 – August 28, 1963) was born in Lemberg in Austria-Hungary (now called Lviv in Ukraine).

From 1900 to 1904 he studied at the Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität in Berlin. In 1905 he started to work at the physics institute at the University of Leipzig. Lilienfeld attained the habilitation in 1910.

Among other things, he invented the transistor (in 1926) and the electrolytic capacitor in the 1920s. He filed several patents describing the construction and operation of transistors. Although the devices described in his patents should theoretically work, there is no evidence that Lilienfeld built working devices. Despite that, the patents describe many features of modern transistors. When the inventors of the first practical transistor, Brattain, Bardeen and Shockley tried to get a patent on their device, most of their claims were rejected due to the Lilienfeld patents.

Lilienfeld emigrated to the USA in 1927.

Some of his patents:

  • (describing a device similar to a MESFET)
  • (A thin film MOSFET.)
  • (A solid state device where the current flow is controlled by a porous metal layer, a solid state version of the vacuum tube.)
  • (The electrolytic capacitor)


Education

Ph.D. Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität (renamed in 1949), Berlin, on 18 February 1905


External links

  • About.com, short text about Lilienfeld
  • J.E.Lilienfeld biography

References

Patents throughout, Real3D

Filed under: Uncategorized — Tags: — admin @ 3:10 am

Real3D, Inc. was a maker of arcade graphics boards whose lineage traces back to the aerospace industry when General Electric sold off its aerospace division (GE Aerospace) to Martin Marietta. In 1995, Martin Marietta and Lockheed merged to form Lockheed Martin Corporation, the world’s largest weapons manufacturer. Following the merger, Lockheed Martin decided to market their cutting-edge graphics technology for civilian use by setting up Real3D, Inc. in partnership with Intel and SGI. In 1999, Real3D sued ATI Technologies over infringement of its patents (originally issued to General Electric in 1988 and 1990) as well as misappropriation of trade secrets (involving the hiring away of several Real3D engineers). By October 1, 1999, Real3D was forced to close its doors and Lockheed sold its remaining stake in Real3D to Intel on October 14th. Following the sale, Intel fired all employees and closed the Orlando office. Interestingly, ATI opened an Orlando office and ostensibly retained many former Real3D designers.


Historical Trivia

  • Real3D’s history traces back over 3 decades to the first GE Aerospace Visual Docking Simulator for the Apollo lunar landings.
  • Real3D technology was shipped on boards in over 200,000 Sega Model2 and Model3 arcade systems, two of the most popular systems in history.
  • Real3D amassed over 40 patents on 3D graphics hardware and software (this was key to the Intel buyout).
  • Real3D has links with modern graphics giant nVidia. First, nVidia acquired all of SGI’s graphics development resources, which included their 10% stake in Real3D. Second, when nVidia purchased 3dfx’s technological assets, they retained licenses to Real3D patents.
  • Real3D has links with modern graphics giant ATI. The two companies were involved in lawsuits over Real3D’s patents until a 2001 cross-licensing settlement.
  • Real3D’s most recent AGP graphics card was the Intel 740 part sold under the StarFighter and Lightspeed brandnames.


External links

  • Book: Funding a Revolution
  • Wave-Report.com
  • GameAI
  • TheRegister - Real3D Dead, Intel buys bones
  • TheRegister - 3dfx Licenses Intel’s Real3D Patents
  • TheRegister - Intel/Real3D and ATI Settle Lawsuit

References

Patent, Dominique Guellec

Filed under: Uncategorized — Tags: , , — admin @ 12:29 am

Dominique Guellec is a French economist. He formerly held the post of chief economist at the European Patent Office (EPO) (2004-2005). Until December 2003, he was senior economist at Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).


See also

  • Alain Pompidou
  • Bruno van Pottelsberghe


External links

  • 2004 biography on the WIPO web site
  • 2003 biography on the WIPO web site

References

December 30, 2007

Application, Remote operations service element protocol

Filed under: Uncategorized — Tags: , — admin @ 8:20 pm

The remote operations service element protocol (ROSE) is an application layer protocol that (a) provides remote operation capabilities, (b) allows interaction between entities in a distributed application, and (c) upon receiving a remote operations service request, allows the receiving entity to attempt the operation and report the results of the attempt to the requesting entity.

OSI application protocols such as X.400 and X.500 were defined using
ROSE. The ROSE protocol itself is defined in ASN.1.


See also

  • Remote procedure call
  • Abstract Syntax Notation One
  • Transaction Capabilities Application Part

References

Patent, Kokai

Filed under: Uncategorized — admin @ 5:13 pm

The kokai or kokai tokkyo koho is the name given to the published, unexamined Japanese patent application, as opposed to the kokoku or tokkyo koho, the examined and approved Japanese patent application. Kokai means “open to the public”, “laid-open”. Kokai are published eighteen months after the earliest priority date.


See also

  • Japanese patent law

References

Patent, Canadian Intellectual Property Office

Filed under: Uncategorized — Tags: , — admin @ 3:58 pm

The Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO) is the patent, trademark, and copyright administration body of Canada.


See also

  • Canadian patent law
  • Manual of Patent Office Practice (MOPOP)
  • Patent office


External links

  • CIPO website

References

Patent Act, Inequitable conduct

Filed under: Uncategorized — Tags: , — admin @ 3:22 pm

In United States patent law, patent holders must go to the federal courts to enforce their patent rights. Even if the patent is valid and infringed, these courts may exercise their equitable discretion not to enforce the patent if the patentee has engaged in inequitable conduct. The patent applicant has a duty of candor and good faith to the US Patent and Trademark Office when applying for their patent. Breach of this duty constitutes inequitable conduct, which includes the following: (a) failure to submit prior art likely to be deemed relevant; (b) failure to explain references in a foreign language or submit pre-existing full or partial translations of the references; (c) misstatements of fact, including misstatements in affidavits concerning patentability; and (d) mis-description of inventorship.

The party asking the court to decline to enforce the patent, usually the alleged infringer, bears the burden of proving inequitable conduct to the court. This party must show by clear and convincing evidence that the patentee intentionally withheld or misrepresented material information.
Proven inequitable conduct in any claim can lead the entire patent to be unenforceable.

The law regarding Inequitable Conduct is currently evolving (see McKesson Information Solutions, Inc. v. Bridge Medical, Inc (2007)) at http://www.fedcir.gov/opinions/06-1517.pdf.


Further reading

  • McKesson v. Bridge Medical
  • Kevin Mack, Reforming Inequitable Conduct to Improve Patent Quality: Cleansing Unclean Hands, 21 Berkeley Tech. L.J. 147](2006).


See also

  • Patent misuse

References

Application, Patent family

Filed under: Uncategorized — Tags: , , — admin @ 1:27 pm

A patent family is all the patents and patent applications resulting from a specific patent application.

Generally, a patent application for an invention is originally filed in one country. Sometimes that original patent application is the basis for filing patent applications in several other countries (see also right of priority). Each of these new patent applications can become the basis for filing subsequent patent applications. A single patent occasionally results in many, many patents throughout the world.

When one patent application results in several patents in many different countries, all of the patents and applications associated with the original patent application is called the patent family.


See also

  • Continuing patent application
  • Triadic patent

References

Patent application, List of bong patents

Filed under: Uncategorized — Tags: , — admin @ 11:40 am

This is a list of bong patents, innovation in devices used to smoke cannabis and tobacco.


Innovations

  • Water pipes or bongs
  • Automatic loading bong
  • Smoking pipe
  • Smoking apparatus and methods of constructing and utilizing same
  • Smoking tube with check valve
  • Removable water tight base for bong
  • Smoking Device


Designs

These include ornamental designs for smoking pipes, substantially as shown and described.

  • Smoker’s implement
  • Smoker’s implement
  • Smoker’s implement
  • Tobacco water pipe
  • Tobacco hookah
  • Tobacco hookah
  • Pipe
  • Pipe
  • Smoking device
  • Water cooled smoking device
  • Smoking pipe

References

Patent, C. F. Streit Mfg. Co.

Filed under: Uncategorized — Tags: , , — admin @ 10:00 am

The C. F. Streit Mfg. Co. was a furniture maker located on Kenner St. in Cincinnati, Ohio. Streit manufactured a number of adjustable furniture pieces, most notably the Slumber Chair which had a combination upholstered seat and back element which could be inclined at various angles. Streit also manufactured a Slumber Davenport with a fold down back which converted to a bed. The Streit Shakespeare Chair was a shallow theater chair with a flip-up upholstered seat.


Patents

  • , February 14, 1880, Extension Lounge
  • , February 19, 1901, Foot Rest For Chairs
  • , June 26, 1928, Chair
  • , July 9, 1929, Chair
  • , August 13, 1943, Chair

References

Patent application, Term of patent

Filed under: Uncategorized — Tags: , — admin @ 8:04 am

The term of a patent is the maximum period during which it can be maintained into force. It is usually expressed in number of years either starting from the filing date of the patent application or from the date of grant of the patent. In most patent laws, renewal annuities or maintenance fees have to be regularly paid in order to keep the patent in force. Otherwise the patent lapses before its term.

The term of a patent or specific “claims” in a patent may also be curtailed by judgment of a court, as where a claim or patent is held “invalid” under the relevant law, and thus no longer enforceable.

Significant international harmonization of patent term across national laws was provided in the 1990s by the implementation of the WTO’s Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs Agreement). Article 33 of the TRIPs Agreement
provides that the

“The term of protection available [for patents] shall not end before the expiration of a period of twenty years counted from the filing date.”

Consequently, in most patent laws nowadays, the term of patent is 20 years from the filing date of the application. This however does not forbid the states party to the WTO from providing, in their national law, other type of patent-like rights with shorter terms. Utility models are an example of such rights. Their term is usually 6 or 10 years.

In the United States, under current patent law, for patents filed on or after June 8, 1995, the term of the patent is 20 years from the earliest claimed filing date. For patents filed prior to June 8, 1995, the term of patent is either 20 years from the earliest claimed filing date or 17 years from the issue date, whichever is longer. Extensions may also be had for various administrative delays. (See: Term of patent in the United States). The exact date of termination may be zealously litigated, especially where daily profits from a patent amount to millions of dollars, e.g., pharmaceuticals.

Other types of patents may have varying terms. For example, in the U.S., design patents (based on a decorative, non-functional design) typically have a 14-year term.

The term of patent protection may also be affected by specific multi-lateral, international agreements. Protection of patents issued in European Union countries were only enforced for three years (until 1995) against pharmaceuticals manufactured in Spain (and cheaply available). Prior to its Treaty of Accession, Spain did not offer patent protection for pharmaceutical products.


Term extensions

If the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) delays the issuance of a patent, it is possible to receive extensions. This may result in patents being issued for periods longer than 20 years. The reasons for extensions include:

  • Delayed response to an application request for patent.
  • Exceeding 3 years to consider a patent application.
  • Delays due to a secrecy order or appeal.

It is possible to receive time extensions equal to the amount of delay.


References

  • USPTO - Patent Term
  • USPTO - Adjustment of patent term.
  • How long is a patent good for


See also

  • Maintenance fee
  • Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property, provides what is called the “priority year”
  • Provisional patent application
  • Submarine patent
  • Supplementary protection certificate (SPC), provides a limited time extension to the protection conferred by certain patents in the European Union

References

Patent, Hog oiler

Filed under: Uncategorized — Tags: — admin @ 6:28 am

A hog oiler was a mechanical device employed on farms to be used by hogs to provide relief from insects and offer skin protection. It consisted of a reservoir to hold oil, and a means to distribute the oil onto the hog, often via grooved wheels or cylinders. Hogs seeking relief would rub up against a wheel (or cylinder) causing it to rotate and dispense oil onto their bodies.

Hog oilers were produced in a variety of designs, most made of cast iron. The era of innovation for this device was mainly the years 1913-1923; during this time some 20 patents were issued by the U.S. Patent Office.

Hog oilers are now considered desirable antiques by collectors of agricultural equipment.


External links

  • Hog oiler images

A few US Patents for hog oilers.

  • Patent issued to E.J. Smith in 1913 for a twin wheel hog oiler.
  • Patent issued to F.R. McDermond in 1916 for a “watermelon type” hog oiler.
  • Patent issued to Albert A. Nasser in 1918 for an overhead tank reservoir hog oiler.

References

Patent, Ingo Kober

Filed under: Uncategorized — Tags: , — admin @ 2:55 am

Ingo Kober was the third president of the European Patent Office. He held this post from January 1, 1996 to June 30, 2004. In 2007, he was President of the Administrative Council of the Centre for International Industrial Property Studies (CEIPI), which is part of the Robert Schuman University. <ref name=”Kober speech”> CEIPI News, epi Information 1/2007, March 2007, pp 10-12</ref>


References

<references/>

References