The federal courts continue to limit where patent plaintiffs can bring their infringement suits in a decision last week by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
Did you know that in the U.S., you can legally buy a single-seat ultralight aircraft and attempt to learn to fly it in uncontrolled airspace without a single lesson? But what do you think the odds are that you’ll be able to successfully take off, maneuver and land during that first flight without a mishap, using only online videos and instruction manuals as your training?
Companies that develop solid IP portfolios during downturns – especially severe downturns – stand to emerge from hard times in much better positions than do those that simply “hunker down and endure”.
Many inventors do not understand a very basic prerequisite to getting a patent: the duty to fully disclose to the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) how to make and use the inventor’s invention. The rationale for this requirement is deeply embedded in the U.S. Constitution—through amplifying statutes and case law—the implication of which is this: “You (the inventor) tell us what you know and we (‘the people,’ more specifically, the government) will give you exclusive rights to your invention for a certain duration.”
Government contractors must proactively negotiate rights among co-collaborators prior to beginning the collaborative process and recognize that the government’s interest in the collaborative workplace may not be aligned with that of each collaborator.
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office 37 CFR Rule 1.56: How Should Patent Applicants Approach Compliance?
All companies should be aware of the Rule and determine at an early stage how inventors should be educated regarding compliance. Often, companies and their patent counsel train inventors to avoid attempting to perform prior art searches or compare their inventions to “what is out there.” This is prudent for a couple reasons.