Our NEWS
The Grammar Secret: the Article “a” Still Signifies ‘One or More,’ but Requires a Single Component Executing All Functions”
On The Grammar Secret: the Article “a” Still Signifies ‘One or More,’ but Requires a Single Component Executing All Functions”
- Babak Akhlaghi
- 05.02.2023
- No Comments
In Salazar v. AT&T Mobility LLC, the Federal Circuit held that the wording “a microprocessor” does not require there to be only one microprocessor in an open ended claim; however, subsequent limitations referring to “said microprocessor” require at least one microprocessor to be capable of […]
KNOW MORE
Navigating Uncharted Waters: Evaluating Patentability in Multiple Dependent Claims
On Navigating Uncharted Waters: Evaluating Patentability in Multiple Dependent Claims
- Babak Akhlaghi
- 02.24.2023
- No Comments
Nested Bean, Inc. (“Petitioner”) filed a Petition (Paper 1, “Pet.”) requesting inter partes review of claims 1-18 of U.S. Patent No. 9,179,711 B2 (Ex. 1001, “the ‘711 patent”). Claims 1 and 2 of the ‘711 patent are independent, and claims 3-16 are multiple dependent claims […]
KNOW MORE
Inventors Under the Patent Act
On Inventors Under the Patent Act
- Babak Akhlaghi
- 02.06.2023
- No Comments
In Thaler v. United States Patent and Trademark Office, the Federal Circuit affirmed the lower court’s ruling that the Patent Act requires an “inventor” to be a natural person. The sole issue on appeal was whether an AI software system can be an inventor under […]
KNOW MORE
Disclaimer Don’t Stick in an IPR
On Disclaimer Don’t Stick in an IPR
- Babak Akhlaghi
- 01.04.2023
- No Comments
CUPP Computing AS (“CUPP”) appeals three inter partes review (“IPR”) decisions of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) concluding that petitioner Trend Micro Inc. had shown challenged claims in CUPP’s U.S. Patents Nos. 8,631,488 (“’488 patent”), 9,106,683 (“’683 patent”), and 9,843,595 (“’595 patent”) unpatentable […]
KNOW MORE
Common Law Collateral Estoppel Applies to Board’s decisions
On Common Law Collateral Estoppel Applies to Board’s decisions
- Babak Akhlaghi
- 03.08.2021
- No Comments
In SYNQOR, INC., v. VICOR CORPORATION, No. 19-1704 (Feb. 22, 2021), the Court held that common law collateral estoppel, also know as issue preclusion, applies to Board’s decisions in inter partes reexaminations. The ‘190 patent issued July 4, 2006, with a family of patents that […]
KNOW MORE
The Sole Test for Anticipation in Design Patents is the “Ordinary Observer Test”
On The Sole Test for Anticipation in Design Patents is the “Ordinary Observer Test”
- Babak Akhlaghi
- 02.25.2021
- No Comments
In MOJAVE DESERT HOLDINGS, LLC, v. CROCS, INC., No. 20-1167 (Feb. 18, 2021), the Court upheld the Board’s finding that the prior art reference failing to show key surfaces in the asserted design patent cannot anticipate it. Crocs owned U.S. Patent No. D517,789 (the ‘798 […]
KNOW MORE
USPS Seeks a Patent for a Blockchain-Based Mail-in Voting System
On USPS Seeks a Patent for a Blockchain-Based Mail-in Voting System
- Babak Akhlaghi
- 12.03.2020
- No Comments
The United States Postal Service (“USPS”) is seeking a patent protection for a more secure vote by mail system. In its recent patent publication, the USPS describes that its voting system is secured by using a blockchain to record data regarding the mailed in votes […]
KNOW MORE
One Key Lesson from Dropbox Losing on 3 Key Patents
On One Key Lesson from Dropbox Losing on 3 Key Patents
- Babak Akhlaghi
- 10.08.2020
- No Comments
In Dropbox Inc., Ornicus Holdings, LLC v. Synchronoss Technologies, Inc., No. 19-1765 (Fed. Cir., Jun 19, 2020), the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit heard an appeal on patent eligibility of three patents, providing a non-precedential but insightful opinion on proper construction of […]
KNOW MORE
Claims Directed to a Network Packet Monitor Held Patent Eligible
On Claims Directed to a Network Packet Monitor Held Patent Eligible
- Babak Akhlaghi
- 08.14.2020
- No Comments
In Packet Intelligence LLC v. Netscout Systems, Inc., No. 19-2041 (Fed. Cir., July 14, 2020) the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld the patent-eligibility of a network packet monitor, finding its claims directed to non-abstract subject matter in light of details included […]
KNOW MORE
An Artificial Intelligence (AI) System Is Not Eligible to be an Inventor
On An Artificial Intelligence (AI) System Is Not Eligible to be an Inventor
- Babak Akhlaghi
- 08.07.2020
- No Comments
On April 22, 2020 the US Patent and Trademark Office ruled that Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems are not eligible to be an Inventor, which the USPTO rules is limited to natural persons. Let’s get into it. On July 29, 2019, an Artificial Inventor Project (AIP, […]
KNOW MORE