" /> Your SEO optimized title

Archive for the ‘Patent Basics’ Category

A Texas Patent Attorney’s Overview of Patent Damages

The main reason why people obtain patents (other than being inspired by Shark Tank) is to stop someone else from making the same product, and if someone else makes the same product to be able to recover damages.

Patent laws require that the damages awarded in patent infringement actions must be “adequate to compensate for the infringement, but in no event less than a reasonable royalty for the use made of the invention by the infringer, together with interest and costs as fixed by the court.” Courts have construed this statutory phrase as award for 1) lost profits, 2) compensatory damages, where the patentee can prove such damages, and 3) enhanced damages.… Read the rest >>

Posted on 01/22/2015 05:34 pm | No Comments
 

Can Computer Software and Mobile Applications Be Patented? Yes!

A common question I get from the start-up community here in Austin is “Can I patent software for my mobile application and software?” Currently the United States is a jurisdiction that allows for software to be patented while other jurisdictions, such as Japan do not allow software to be patented.… Read the rest >>

Posted on 08/08/2013 09:38 am | No Comments
 

2013 Best Patent Law Firms indicating which firms have Austin, Texas Offices.

Below is a list of the top 10 patent law firms in the US based on issued patents over the following years: 2011, 2012, 2013.

I am pleased to see that my former firm, Harness, Dickey, and Pierce is still listed as a top 5 law firm even after my departure.… Read the rest >>

Posted on 08/01/2013 12:33 pm | No Comments
 

What are the differences between a Non-Final and a Final Office Action?

WHAT IS AN OFFICE ACTION?

An “office action” is an official letter from the United States Patent and Trademark Office representing a patent examiner’s review of the status of a pending patent action. Typically, an office action indicated that none, some, or all of the pending claims are allowable, and the patent examiner’s concerns regarding the claims.… Read the rest >>

Posted on 08/01/2013 11:37 am | No Comments
 

What are the differences between a 35 USC 102 and a 35 USC 103 rejection?

During patent prosecution it is likely that a patent examiner at the USPTO will issue an office action with a 35 USC 102 and or 35 USC 103 rejections. Samples for responding to a 35 USC 102 rejection can be found here and 35 USC 103 rejection here.… Read the rest >>

Posted on 07/31/2013 01:05 pm | No Comments
 

Should I file a design patent, a provisional patent, or both?

Initially please review an overview of design patents (overview of design patents) and provisional patents (overview of provisional patents).

To determine whether to file a design patent or a provisional/utility patent application it is helpful to understand what your invention is directed towards.… Read the rest >>

Posted on 07/22/2013 10:19 am | No Comments
 

Should My Start-Up File A Provisional Or A Non-Provisional Patent Application?

A common question I receive from inventors and decision makers at Start-ups is whether they should file a provisional patent application or a non-provisional patent application for their new invention. There are benefits and detriments to both ways of beginning the patent process for an invention, which in some industries may be more important.… Read the rest >>

Posted on 07/19/2013 11:59 am | 1 Comment
 

What are Examiner Interviews? How should I prepare and conduct one?

Examiner interviews are good ways that an application (a patent attorney and/or inventor) can discuss an office action and the related art with the issuing Examiner. Typically, Examiners will issue office actions with 35 USC 102 or 35 USC 103 with art they use to meet each and every element of your claims.… Read the rest >>

Posted on 07/01/2013 09:06 pm | No Comments
 

How to respond to a 35 USC 103 rejection?

Linked is a sample response to Office Actions from the USPTO PatentAttorneyTemplateResponsetoOfficeActions

Examiners commonly reject claims as being obvious as 35 USC 103 in view of a combination of prior art. 35 USC 103(a) states:

(a)  A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains.… Read the rest >>

Posted on 06/28/2013 09:50 am | No Comments
 

What is a patent restriction requirement under 37 CFR 1.142?

Restriction requirements occur when a patent examiner at the USPTO deems that an inventor has included more than one invention in a patent application. With the recent increase in filing fees, there may be a strong desire to include patent claims directed to a plurality of related, but separate inventions into one patent application.… Read the rest >>

Posted on 06/10/2013 09:32 pm | No Comments
 
 
All materials © 2015 Pierson Intellectual Property Web site by Websy Daisy.