Patent management

January 31, 2008

Application, CAPI

Filed under: Uncategorized — admin @ 8:33 pm

CAPI is an acronym for:

  • Application Programming Interface for Calendar, Calendar is made by Steltor and is the same calendar that is included with earlier versions of Netscape.
  • Common ISDN Application Programming Interface, an API providing access to the ISDN communications protocol.
  • Computer Assisted Personal Interviewing, a surveying technique that uses a computer based questionnaire.
  • Cryptographic Application Programming Interface, is an interface to a library of functions software developers can call upon for security and cryptography services.
  • Computer Aided Process Improvement, a method of analyzing business processes using simulation.
  • Communications Application Programming Interface, a low-level, “close to the silicon” communication library intended to support efficient implementation of message-passing programming models (such as MPI from the distributed / high-performance computing arena) on multi-core chips, in development by the Multicore Association (MCA).

References

Patent, Probatio diabolica

Filed under: Uncategorized — Tags: — admin @ 7:34 pm

Probatio diabolica (Latin: “devil’s proof”) is a legal requirement to achieve an impossible proof. Where a legal system would appear to require an impossible proof, the remedies are reversing the burden of proof, or giving additional rights to the individual facing the probatio diabolica.

For example, one party might patent a process for manufacturing an item. Another party might then make the item. The patent holder would normally have to show that the patented process had been improperly used; this is a probatio diabolica since on the face of it the patent holder has no information on what process was actually used, and this could render the patent useless. Two possible solutions exist:

  • the burden of proof is reversed by presuming that the second manufacturer has improperly used the patented process, unless or until he demonstrates that he has used some other process; or
  • the patent holder is given discovery rights, enabling him to get information from the second manufacturer on the process actually used.

References

Patent, Europe-wide patent

Filed under: Uncategorized — Tags: — admin @ 5:07 pm
For more information about European patent law in general, see European patent law.

The

expression Europe-wide patent may refer either to

  • the Community patent, a European Union project to create a unitary patent in all EU member states; or to
  • European patents, granted by the European Patent Office under to the European Patent Convention, the enforcement of which is dealt with before national courts.

References

Patent, Innovation and its Discontents

Filed under: Uncategorized — admin @ 4:25 pm

Innovation and its Discontents: How our Broken Patent System is Endangering Innovation and Progress, and What to do About it is a book ISBN 0-691-11725-X) by Adam B. Jaffe and Josh Lerner. Princeton University Press published the book in 2004.

The authors of the book outline changes made to the patent system in the United States in the late 1980s and early 1990s which they say has led to a situation in which patents have become extremely powerful economic weapons, and are being issued irresponsibly and at an unreasonable rate.

The end result, the authors claim, is that American innovation is being stifled unintentionally as a result of a few simple bureaucratic changes (centralizing the appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and making patent application fees the primary source of revenue for the United States Patent and Trademark Office). The authors argue that the establishment of the CAFC has led to judicial “tunnel vision”; because the judges of the CAFC are only asked to rule on matters of intellectual property, they come to value the current patent system too highly, and tend to side disproportionately with patent-holders.

The authors frame the current debate about patents in historical terms, citing both times when patents were freely granted as royal favors, such as the Elizabethan era in England, as well as times when patents were impossible to obtain, or in the case of the Netherlands in the 1830s, completely abolished.


See also

  • Sealed crustless sandwich

References

Patent, INPADOC

Filed under: Uncategorized — admin @ 1:30 pm

INPADOC, which stands for International Patent Documentation Center, is an international patent collection. The database is produced and maintained by the European Patent Office (EPO). It contains patent families and legal status information, and is updated weekly.

INPADOC was founded by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) and the government of Austria under an agreement on May 2 1972. A little less than twenty years later, on January 1 1990, it was integrated into the European Patent Office. An EPO sub-office was then created in Vienna, Austria.

The INPADOC database, which is publicly accessible, provides information about patent families, i.e. corresponding patent applications, i.e., patent applications in different countries which claim the same priority and which normally disclose the same invention. It also provides information concerning the legal status of patent applications and patents in those countries which report status changes.


See also

  • esp@cenet
  • International Patent Classification
  • Patent classification


External links

  • INPADOC page on the EPO web site

References

A Patent, Patent family

Filed under: Uncategorized — Tags: — admin @ 1:08 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

Of 1952 Patent Reform, Unity of invention

Filed under: Uncategorized — Tags: — admin @ 9:42 am

In most patent laws, unity of invention is a formal administrative requirement that must be met by a patent application in order to proceed to grant. Basically a patent application can relate only to one invention or a group of closely related inventions. The purpose of this provision is administrative, and in particular financial, i.e. it serves to limit the possibility to file one patent application for several inventions while paying only one set of fees (filing fee, search fee, examination fee, renewal fees and so on). Unity of invention also makes the classification of patent documents easier.

When a patent application is objected to on the ground of a lack of unity, patent protection is not ruled out, as it would be the case if the invention was found to be lacking novelty. A divisional application can usually be filed for the second invention, and for the further inventions if any. Alternatively, a patent prosecutor may make a technical argument that there is unity of invention to overcome the objection.

Contents


Jurisdictions


European Patent Convention

Under European patent practice and case law, lack of unity (of invention) can appear either “a priori“, i.e. before taking into account the prior art, or “a posteriori“, i.e. after having taken into account the prior art. An a posteriori lack of unity usually results from a lack of novelty or inventive step of the subject-matter of one independent claim.


United States

In U.S. patent law, applications that claim more than one distinct invention may be subject to restriction to a single invention with the right to prosecute the remaining invention(s) being preserved through the right to file a divisional application(s). A “restriction requirement” will typically present the different inventions based on the claims within the application and the applicant may elect which invention to prosecute.


See also

  • Patentability
  • Novelty
  • Inventive step and non-obviousness
  • Industrial application
  • Sufficiency of disclosure


External links

  • European Patent Convention (EPC)

  • Title 35 of the United States Code (35 U.S.C.)
    • 35 U.S.C. §121: Divisional applications

References

1790, Jan Krasiński

Filed under: Uncategorized — Tags: , — admin @ 8:00 am
Jan Krasiński
Noble Family Krasiński
Coat of Arms Ślepowron
Parents Michał Krasiński
Aleksandra Załuska
Consorts Antonina Czacka
Children with Antonina Czacka
Wincenty Krasiński
Date of Birth April 5, 1756
Place of Birth  ?
Date of Death November 24, 1790
Place of Death  ?

Jan Krasiński (1756-1790) was a Polish nobleman (szlachcic).

Jan became starost of Opiniogóra in 1774 and Rotmistrz of National cavalry. His grandson Zygmunt Krasiński, became one of Poland’s greatest romantic poets.

References

Family, Cornales

Filed under: Uncategorized — Tags: , — admin @ 7:51 am

Cornales is an order of flowering plants, basal among the asterids, which are part of the core eudicots. APG includes the following families:

  • Family Cornaceae (dogwood family)
  • Family Nyssaceae (tupelo family)
  • Family Hydrangeaceae (hydrangea family)
  • Family Loasaceae (stickleaf family)
  • Family Hydrostachyaceae
  • Family Curtisiaceae (cape lancewood)
  • Family Grubbiaceae (sillyberry family)

Under the Cronquist system the order instead comprised the families Cornaceae, Garryaceae, and Alangiaceae, and was placed among the Rosidae.

References

Patent, Hymen Lipman

Filed under: Uncategorized — admin @ 6:02 am

Hymen L. Lipman is credited with registering the first patent for a pencil with an attached eraser on March 30, 1858 ().

In 1862 Lipman sold his patent to Joseph Reckendorfer for $100,000, who went to sue the pencil manufacturer Faber for infringement Petroski, Henry (1990). The Pencil: A History of Design and Circumstance. New York: Alfred A. Knopf. ISBN 0-394-57422-2; ISBN 0-679-73415-5, page 171. In 1875 the Supreme Court of the United States ruled against Reckendorfer declaring the patent invalid because his invention was actually a combination of two already known things with no new usehttp://supreme.justia.com/us/92/347/case.html Reckendorfer v. Faber 92 U.S. 347 (1875).


References

References

Patent, European Patent Institute

Filed under: Uncategorized — Tags: — admin @ 4:44 am

The Institute of Professional Representatives before the European Patent Office or European Patent Institute (epi) is a professional association of European patent attorneys and an international non-governmental public law corporation. It was founded on October 21 1977 by the Administrative Council of the European Patent Organisation. Article 134(8)(b) of the European Patent Convention (EPC), signed at Munich, Germany on October 5, 1973. All European patent attorneys, i.e. all persons entitled to act as professional representatives before the EPO (by virtue of either the European qualifying examination or the provisions of Article 163, paragraph 7 EPC), are members of the Institute. Article 5(1) of the Regulation on the establishment of an institute of professional representatives before the European Patent Office, OJ 1997, 350 with corrections according to OJ 1997, 130, OJ 2002, 429 and OJ 2004, 361.

The European Patent Institute publishes a quarterly journal, the epi Information (). The current president of the European Patent Institute is Chris P. Mercer. European Patent Institute web site, Board Members, retrieved on July 12, 2006.


See also

  • Intellectual property organization


References


External links

  • Official web page
  • epi Information
    • Current issue
    • Archive issues, since 1999

References

Patent, Hog oiler

Filed under: Uncategorized — admin @ 4:36 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, Disclaimer (patent)

Filed under: Uncategorized — admin @ 4:30 am

In patent law, a disclaimer is an amendment consisting in limiting a claim of a patent or patent application by introducing a negative technical feature. It typically consists in excluding from a general feature specific embodiments or areas. During prosecution, such amendments are sometimes made by applicants to their application, with the hope of fulfilling some patentability criteria, such as the novelty criterion.

The allowability of disclaimers is usually subject to certain conditions, which may vary from one country to another.


European Patent Office (EPO)

Under the case law of the Boards of Appeal of the EPO, disclaimers are allowed only in certain circumstances, as confirmed in G 1/03 and G 2/03 decisions.

“A disclaimer [which is not disclosed in the description] may be allowable in order to:

  • restore novelty by delimiting a claim against state of the art under ;
  • restore novelty by delimiting a claim against an accidental anticipation under ; an anticipation is accidental if it is so unrelated to and remote from the claimed invention that the person skilled in the art would never have taken it into consideration when making the invention; and
  • disclaim subject-matter which, under Articles 52 to 57 EPC, is excluded from patentability for non-technical reasons.” [1]


References

  • Guidelines for Examination in the EPO, Part C

    • Chapter III, 4.12. Negative limitations (e.g. disclaimers) [2]
    • Chapter VI, 5.3.11. Disclaimers not disclosed in the application as filed [3]
  • Patentability of Negative Limitations at the USPTO [4]


See also

  • Proviso (patent)

References

Patent, Patent Act

Filed under: Uncategorized — Tags: — admin @ 2:43 am

A Patent Act is a country’s legislation that controls the use of patents. There have been numerous Patent Acts:

Canada:

  • Canadian Patent Act

Germany:

  • German Patents Act (”Patentgesetz“)

United Kingdom:

  • Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988

United States:

  • Patent Act of 1790
  • Patent Act of 1793
  • Patent Act of 1836
  • Patent Act of 1952
  • Patent Reform Act of 2005 (currently pending legislation; not yet enacted)
  • Patent and Trademark Law Amendments Act of 1980

References

January 30, 2008

In several patents, Roussel Uclaf

Filed under: Uncategorized — Tags: , , — admin @ 4:04 pm

Roussel Uclaf is a French company, headquartered in Romainville. It is involved in healthcare, agro-chemical, animal health and related fields, although in 1994, many of its non-core activities were transferred to Hoechst Schering AgrEvo GmBH in Germany.

Although it has more than 10,000 patents worldwide, Roussel Uclaf is best known for mifepristone, otherwise known by its laboratory name of RU 486. The US patent rights for this drug were donated to Population Council, Inc., a not-for-profit corporation in the USA, in 1994.

References

Applications associated with the, Dumb network

Filed under: Uncategorized — admin @ 11:55 am

A dumb network is marked by using intelligent devices (i.e., PCs) at the periphery that make use of a network that does not interfere with an application’s operation. The dumb network concept is the natural outcome of the end to end principle. The Internet was originally designed to operate as a dumb network.

In some circles the dumb network is regarded as a natural culmination of technological progress in network technology. With the justification that the dumb network uniquely satisfies the requirements of the end to end principle for application creation, supporters see the dumb network as uniquely qualified for this purpose. In reality the dumb network is only one position in a continuum of network design. Its attributes are suitable for the creation of certain types of network applications but are considered deleterious for others.

A dumb network, by design, is not sensitive to the needs of applications. The dumb network model can, in some ways, allow for flexibility and ease of innovation in the development of applications that is not matched by other models.

Critics of dumb network architecture posit two arguments in favor of “intelligent” networks. The first, that certain users and transmission needs of certain applications are more important than others and thus should be granted greater network priority. An example is that of real time video applications that are more time sensitive than say, text applications. Thus video transmissions would receive network priority to prevent picture skips, while text transmissions could be delayed with few if any problems affecting its application performance. The second is that networks should be able to defend against attacks by malware and other bad actors.

Advocates of dumb networks counter the first argument by pointing out that prioritizing network traffic is very expensive, both in monetary and network performance terms; also, advocates consider this a bandwidth problem and not a network protocol issue. The security argument is that malware is an end-to-end problem and thus should be dealt with at the endpoints, and that attempting to adapt the network to counter attacks is both cumbersome, inefficient.

The dumb network (and the end to end principle) was conceived of as an antithesis to the idea of a centralized intelligent computer network in which all applications were under central network control. A synthesis is taking place in the concept application aware networks or as they are sometimes called context aware networks. These networks allow intelligent devices to set up end to end applications as in the dumb network. However they are aware of application needs and in the social and enterprise context in which the applications are being used. Thus the network can make decisions on resource allocation conflicts in light of the collective needs of all users and the purposes (social and enterprise) that guide them.

References

Patent, Hymen Lipman

Filed under: Uncategorized — Tags: — admin @ 11:50 am

Hymen L. Lipman is credited with registering the first patent for a pencil with an attached eraser on March 30, 1858 ().

In 1862 Lipman sold his patent to Joseph Reckendorfer for $100,000, who went to sue the pencil manufacturer Faber for infringement Petroski, Henry (1990). The Pencil: A History of Design and Circumstance. New York: Alfred A. Knopf. ISBN 0-394-57422-2; ISBN 0-679-73415-5, page 171. In 1875 the Supreme Court of the United States ruled against Reckendorfer declaring the patent invalid because his invention was actually a combination of two already known things with no new usehttp://supreme.justia.com/us/92/347/case.html Reckendorfer v. Faber 92 U.S. 347 (1875).


References

References

Patent, Johan van Benthem

Filed under: Uncategorized — Tags: , , — admin @ 10:08 am

Johan van Benthem may refer to:

  • the first president of the European Patent Office, Johannes Bob van Benthem
  • a Dutch professor of logic, Johannes Franciscus Abraham Karel van Benthem

References

Patent, Athalite

Filed under: Uncategorized — admin @ 9:35 am

Athalite is claimed by its manufacturer to be a proprietary material used in the tips of the ColdHeat soldering tool. The name is derived from “Accelerated THermal Action”. It is a composite material and it is highly malleable. [1] However, the material is very fragile.

The manufacturer claims a trademark on the name.


Composition of Athalite

Athalite is most likely composed of graphite. It might also be formed by other materials containing semiconductive elements such as germanium or silicon, as stated in the ColdHeat patent application. A nickel-chromium or other resistive alloy is another possibility listed in the application, but is unlikely to have been used. US Patent No. 6,646,228


External links

  • Official website
  • US Patent No. 6,646,228
  • US Patent No. 6,797,924
  • US Patent No. 6,831,252

References

World. When one, World clock

Filed under: Uncategorized — admin @ 8:56 am

A world clock is a clock which displays time from around the world. The clock face can be multiple round analog clocks with moving hands or digital clocks with numeric readouts. Each clock is labeled with the name of a major city or time zone in the world. It could also be a picture map of the world with light projection representing daytime.


External Links

  • World Clock requires Flash and displays world demographic estimates
  • World Clock Information displays the date and time for over 250 cities on a world map
  • The World Clock - Time Zones, Current local times around the world. Includes Personal World Clock - shows just the cities you need.
  • gChart World Running Clock on Google Map - Current local times around the world in real-time running clock by a single click on Google world map.
  • World Clock - Current Local Times continously updating times for major world cities

References

Newer Posts »

Powered by WordPress