March 30, 2010
Mi iPad, Su iPad
For a company that has blissfully innovated technology in our world that we hold so dear to our hearts, Apple sure does lack innovation in naming of their products. Good thing that Apple is popular and has some deep pockets – we’re talking the kind of deep pockets that compare to Ed Harris’s decent in The Abyss (1989). Using those deep pockets, Apple has managed to attain the trademark “iPad” from Fujitsu, and move to a 3-0 record in name bouts (their battles over the “Apple Inc.” and “iPhone” names coming before).
The iPad, Apple’s newly anticipated product, which seems to fall between their iPhone and iMac products, will allow the user to surf the web, listen to music, browse photos, and access iBooks, just to name a few functions. The name “iPad” was formerly held by the Japan-based company, Fujitsu, for a similar product used in retail stores. However, Fujitsu and Apple recently negotiated the assignment of Fujitsu’s interest in the “iPad” trademark to Apple for undisclosed terms, coming just before the release of Apple’s iPad on April 3, 2010. For the uninitiated, undisclosed terms roughly translates to big, giant settlement dollars!
March 23, 2010
@USPTO: *Wyeth* didn’t you calculate my patent term correctly?
These days it’s all about that little extra. Why should it be any different when it comes to the United States Patent and Trademark Office? It was recently decided in Wyeth v. Kappos, No. 2009-1120 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 7, 2010) that the USPTO’s calculation of the Patent Term Adjustments (PTA) took that little extra away from patentees. The PTA is the amount of additional time allotted to a patent when certain deadlines are not met during the examination process.
The deadlines are laid out in two different subsections within Title 35 of the United State Code: § 154(b)(1)(A) and § 154(b)(1)(B). The deadlines included in §154 (b)(1)(A) include an issuance of an Office Action within 14 months of the date the patent application was filed, 4 months to respond to a reply, 4 months to act on an application after a decision by the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences, and 4 months to issue a patent from the date the issue fee was paid. Anything longer than that is an “A Delay.” Pursuant to §154 (b)(1)(B), the USPTO must issue a patent within 3 years of the application of the patent (provided, of course, that the subject matter meets the other requirements for patentability). Anything longer than that is a “B Delay,” according to the Wyeth Opinion. Should any of these provisions occur, the patentee is entitled to an extension to the term of their patent until the provision is satisfied.
March 15, 2010
Facebook Awarded Patent on News Feed
On February 23, 2010, Facbook, Inc. was awarded U.S. Patent No. 7,669,123 titled Dynamically Providing A News Feed About A User Of A Social Network. Anyone that uses Facebook understands how the “news feed” feature works. You put something in as your status, or you perform some function using Facebook, and your friends can view that you have done or have posted in their news feed, along with the activities of everyone else that they are friends with. It seems to me that Twitter (feel free to follow us on Twitter @LegalTeamUSA and @TacticalIP, or me personally @PTOLawyer) does something similar, but to a much smaller scale. A user of Twitter can view updates from people that they follow. It is a bit more informal than Facebook, and it does not allow a user to provide nearly as much information as they can provide on Facebook.
Claim 1 of the Facebook patent reads as follows:
March 10, 2010
Lindsay Lohan Publicly Admits Milk Addiction
Earlier this week, Lindsay Lohan filed a $100 million suit against online financial services company, E-Trade. In her complaint (you can read it here), Ms. Lohan accuses E-Trade of appropriating her likeness in its Super Bowl ad, wherein the spokesbaby’s girlfriend accuses him of not calling her because he was with “that milkaholic, Lindsay.”
March 7, 2010
Patent Reform Act Moving Forward
Well, I’ve heard this one before – the Patent Reform Act is moving forward. This is something that has been, allegedly, moving forward for years. The article that I read noted that patent reform has been introduced in each of the last three Congresses. Does this one have a chance of passing? There’s really no telling.
Senators Leahy and Hatch have been big proponents of patent reform over the years. I appreciate that they realize the importance of intellectual property. Over the years, the various versions of the patent reform act have attempted to address issues such as moving to a “first to file” system, damages, and third party comments on pending patent applications. This proposed bill addresses those issues, as well as others allowing the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to set fees in an attempt to address the backlog problem.
March 4, 2010
An Open Letter to Television Writers and Producers re:Civilian Consultants
Dear Television Writers and Producers:
Let me start off by saying that I am a huge fan of television and that I particularly enjoy the pervasive one-hour episodic drama genre. Cop and lawyer shows are my absolute favorite, despite the fact that they often present embellishments and minor procedural inaccuracies. One of the only things that a legal education is guaranteed to do is suck all of the enjoyment out of watching courtroom shows that play it fast and loose with the formalities of litigation, but I’ve learned to ignore most of the discomfort that comes from watching a make-believe prosecutor present character evidence in his case-in-chief. I hardly cringe anymore when I hear scripted dialog about “robbing” a house or “murdering” an animal. I am writing today, however, to tell you of a related faux pas that I haven’t been able to ignore.
“Are you saying that our show is unoriginal?”
As I’m sure you are aware, a subclass of the traditional police show has been popping up with greater frequency in recent years. The basic premise for these shows is this: A civilian “consultant” is brought in by a law enforcement agency, based on some enhanced knowledge or skill possessed by said civilian, thereby magically improving the agency’s crime solving abilities. Amongst this subclass, I am a religious viewer of Psych, The Mentalist, Castle, White Collar, Fringe, and Bones (I can’t stand this one, to be honest, but it’s my wife’s favorite), to name a few. With varying degrees of success, each of these programs attempts to present a compelling dynamic between straight-laced cops and one or more outside-the-box thinkers, who presumably aren’t bound by the paradigm that you’re typical “G-man” occupies. It’s a classic odd couple arrangement – rambunctious corner cutter plays off of an endearing straight man. My issue lies with one particular outside-the-box solution that is floated again and again on these shows.
