|
|
|
Reports - News
NEWS
U.S. Supreme Court Addresses Induced Patent Infringement The Supreme Court concluded in in Global-Tech Appliances v. SEB, , in an 8-1 decision, that “willful blindness” will not enable defendants to escape the law by deliberately shielding themselves from clear evidence that their conduct is wrong. Induced infringement under 35 U.S.C. §271(b) states that “Whoever actively induces infringement of a patent shall be liable as an infringer.” However, §271(b) requires knowledge of the Patent that is infringed. The Court concluded that, “This evidence was more than sufficient for a jury to find that Pentalpha subjectively believed there was a high probability that SEB’s fryer was patented, that Pentalpha took deliberate steps to avoid knowing that fact, and that it therefore blinded iteself.” The ruling leaves intact a $4.88 million judgment against Pentalpha, a Hong Kong-based division of Global Tech. The infringed patent is U.S. Patent No. 4,995,312.
USPTO to Open First-Ever Satellite Patent Office -- In Detroit The U.S. Patent Office has announced for the first time in 230 years, there will be a Patent Office outside the Washington D.C. area. The first city selected is Detroit, Michigan. The idea is to hire more patent examiners and get them closer to industry expertise, patent attorneys and research institutions in order to more quickly process patent applications. Michigan is one of America’s most important centers of high-tech innovation. More than 31,000 patents have been granted to Michigan applicants since 2001. Michigan companies will gain important benefits from this satellite Patent Office.
The U.S. Supreme Court Issues Ruling in Business Methods Patents Case The U.S. Supreme Court issued its legal opinion in Bilski v. Kappos on June 28, 2010, and many intellectual property observers are relieved. The claimed invention in Bilski was a method for managing commodity trading risk, raised questions about what is patentable under U.S. law – and in particular where is the line between patentable inventions and abstract ideas that could not be patented. The Supreme Court held that (1) the method at issue was too abstract to be patented, (2) business methods are not categorically unpatentable, and that (3)the CAFC’s “machine or transformation” test, while an important consideration, is not the only test for patent eligibility. Information age companies and patent practitioners should take heart in the decision that their inventions will continue to be protectable under the U.S. patent law.
ANNUAL REPORTS
The U.S. Patent Office Annual Report for FY2011. There were 456,106 utility Patent Applications and 25,806 Design Applications filed in 2009. For Patent Applications processed during this period, the average First Office Action was issued at 28.0 months after the filing date; the number of Patent Applications awaiting First Office Action is well below 700,000; and the average total pendancy time for Applications resolved during this period was 33.7 months. At the end of 2011 there were 6780 Patent Examiners and 378 Trademark Examining Attorneys. The report is available online at USPTO 2011 Annual Report.
WIPO - An Overview “The WIPO Overview” explains in simple terms how the Organization works and how it carries out its mission to promote a balanced IP system. The publication provides up-to-date information and concrete examples of WIPO's activities and achievements over the past year. Updated editions are issued annually.. Download a current copy of the report at World Patent Report (2011).
|
|
