Jack Daniels vs Bad Spaniels: Funny Jokes and Free Speech
Patently-O
by Dennis Crouch
3d ago
It is hard for me to believe that the US Supreme Court is hearing the case of Jack Daniels vs Bad Spaniels. For those who don’t know, Jack Daniels is a form of Whiskey.  VIP Products makes and sells a squeaking dog toy known as “bad spaniels.” The setup here is a humorous parody, but JD is not laughing. Jack Daniels sent a cease-and-desist letter to VIP who then filed a declaratory judgment action in Arizona. The district court sided with JD on both TM infringement and dilution and issued an injunction to stop ongoing sales and distribution.  (The excrementory references in Bad Span ..read more
Visit website
Copyright and AI – Zarya of the Dawn
Patently-O
by Dennis Crouch
4d ago
by Dennis Crouch In a prior post, I mentioned that the Copyright Office had canceled the registration for “Zarya of the Dawn,” a book purportedly created mainly by AI.  That was in error apparently generated by the Office’s new Copyright Public Records System.    The attorney for the human author – Kristina Kashtanova – contacted me to point out the error and you can see that the errors have been corrected. The copyright is currently registered.   View this post on Instagram   A post shared by Kris Kashtanova (@kris.kashtanova) That said, the Copyright Office has ..read more
Visit website
An Update on AI Inventorship and Authorship Cases
Patently-O
by Dennis Crouch
6d ago
by Dennis Crouch In 2022, the Federal Circuit held that an invention is only eligible for a US patent if a human conceived of the invention. Thus, no patents for invention wholly conceived by artificial intelligence.  Thaler v. Vidal, 43 F.4th 1207 (Fed. Cir. 2022).  Thaler’s petition for writ of certiorari to the US Supreme Court would have been due last week, but Thaler was able to obtain an extension with the petition now being due March 19, 2023.  Thaler’s main attorney throughout this process has been Professor Ryan Abbott. The team recently added appellate attorney and Sup ..read more
Visit website
Mandamus Reasonably Denied
Patently-O
by Dennis Crouch
1w ago
In re General Motors Co. (Fed. Cir. 2022) Without much pretense, the Federal Circuit has rejected GM’s petition to the Federal Circuit seeking transfer of its case out of the Western District of Texas.  In 2021, Intellectual Ventures (IV) sued GM for infringement of twelve different patents — all focusing on features of GM’s OnStar service.  GM wanted the case to moved up to Michigan on convenience grounds, but Judge Albright Refused.  In particular, Judge Albright noted that GM has a major IT Innovation Center in WD Tex (Austin) that includes potential witnesses.  On manda ..read more
Visit website
Laching-On to Inexcusable Behavior
Patently-O
by Dennis Crouch
1w ago
Guest Post by Jordan Duenckel.  Jordan is a second-year law student at the University of Missouri, head of our IP student association, and a registered patent agent.  The Federal Circuit released its opinion in Personalized Media Communications, LLC, Vs. Apple Inc., Docket No. 2021-2275 on January 20, 2023, in a dispute involving an alleged pattern of inappropriate conduct during patent prosecution. In a split decision, the Federal Circuit ruled that the district court did not abuse its discretion in declaring a patent unenforceable based on prosecution laches. Apple FairPlay uses d ..read more
Visit website
Request for Comments on USPTO Initiatives to Ensure the Robustness and Reliability of Patent Rights
Patently-O
by Dennis Crouch
1w ago
Feb 1, 2023, is the new deadline for providing comments to the USPTO on this RFC. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/10/04/2022-21481/request-for-comments-on-uspto-initiatives-to-ensure-the-robustness-and-reliability-of-patent-rights Topics: The USPTO invites written responses to the following questions and requests. Commenters are welcome to respond to any or all of the questions. 1. Identify any specific sources of prior art not currently available through the Patents End-to-End Search system that you believe examiners should be searching. How should the USPTO facilitate a ..read more
Visit website
Guest Post by Prof. Hrdy & Dan Brean: The Patent Law Origins of Science Fiction
Patently-O
by Jason Rantanen
1w ago
Guest post by Camilla A. Hrdy, Professor of Intellectual Property Law at University of Akron School of Law, and Daniel H. Brean, Senior In-House Intellectual Property Counsel, Respiratory Care, Philips. Are inventions described in works of science fiction patentable? The answer is usually no, and for good reason. Some of the most beloved fixtures of the genre—time machines, faster-than-light space travel, teleportation, downloading memories, copying a consciousness, etcetera—are impossible or not yet possible when described by the author. This sort of science fiction is not patentable bec ..read more
Visit website
Director Review: Petitioner must Prove its Case
Patently-O
by Dennis Crouch
1w ago
by Dennis Crouch Apple Inc. v. Zipit Wireless, Inc., 2022 WL 18108215 (PTO Dir., Dec. 21, 2022) Back in December, Director Vidal issued an important director review decision holding an IPR challenger must prove that the challenged claims are invalid, even if the patentee raises no defense.  The PTAB appears to have incorrectly treated the situation as more of a default judgment even though the patentee had not expressly abandoned. Apple filed three IPR petitions against each of two Zipit patents.  The PTAB instituted IPR proceedings in all six.  At that point, Zipit filed paten ..read more
Visit website
Supreme Court asked to Review Federal Circuit’s Judicial Shell Game
Patently-O
by Dennis Crouch
1w ago
by Dennis Crouch Novartis Pharms v. HEC Pharm (Supreme Court 2023) Some drug treatments perform better if the patient starts with a loading dosage before shifting to the regular daily amount. But, loading dosages can be risky because of the high dosage and because of the greater likelihood of mistakes.  Novartis was able to configure a multiple sclerosis treatment plan without the loading dosage.  Its claims require the administration of fingolimod “at a daily dosage of 0.5 mg, absent an immediately preceding loading dose regimen.” US Patent No. 9,187,405. The problem for Novartis is ..read more
Visit website
Supreme Court Taking Additional Look at Apple’s Estoppel Petition
Patently-O
by Dennis Crouch
1w ago
by Dennis Crouch The Supreme Court has added a fourth case to its list of potentials for 2023: Apple Inc., v. California Institute of Technology, Docket No. 22-203.  The case is extremely important for our patent system because it could define key aspects of the interplay between inter partes review (IPR) proceedings and parallel district court litigation. IPR Estoppel Provision: In traditional patent infringement litigation, accused infringers almost always raise invalidity defenses — arguing that the patent fails to satisfy the conditions of patentability set forth in the Patent Act.&n ..read more
Visit website

Follow Patently-O on Feedspot

Continue with Google
OR