1. Commil v Cisco was granted cert by the US Supreme Court which
will now decide on whether a defendant’s belief that a patent is invalid as a
defence to inducing infringement. The ‘Written Description’ blog comments on
this here.
2. IEEE Spectrum’s yearly roundup of the strongest US patent
portfolios can be found here.
Johnson & Johnson continues to dominate the biotech and pharma fields. IEEE
Spectrum’s very sophisticated ranking system is discussed here.
An unrelated article on Patent Rating Systems by AcclaimIP can be found here.
3. See our post on the UK decision Hospira v Genentech on
the PatLit blog here.
This has an interesting discussion of ‘product by process’ claims which is
further discussed on IPKat here.
4. Amending claims during IPR proceedings before the PTAB is
proving to be difficult. PatentDocs discusses it here.
Jones Day discusses it here.
5. From Electronic Frontier Foundation news about a
Defensive Patent Licence (see here).
Our own thoughts on rethinking the patent system here.
6. Is the Alice test becoming a way of judging claim
breadth? PatentDocs looking at Ultramercial v Hulu believe so (see here).
See also Pearl Cohen here,
and EquityNet here.
7. DDR Holdings v Hotels is the decision that upheld a
computer-implemented invention patent. Patently O here
and here,
PatLit here,
IPWatchdog here.
According to Judge Chen this was patentable because the claims “do not merely recite the
performance of some business practice known from the pre-Internet world along
with the requirement to perform it on the Internet. Instead, the claimed
solution is necessarily rooted in computer technology in order to overcome a problem
specifically arising in the realm of computer networks.”
No comments:
Post a Comment