Remove Article Remove Design Patent Remove Litigation Remove Patent Prosecution
article thumbnail

Build a Consumer Base with Innovation; Protect Sales with Design Patents

IP Watchdog

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued its one millionth design patent on September 26, 2023. D1,000,000 claims the ornamental design for a dispensing comb. This milestone comes during a particularly prolific period for design patents.

article thumbnail

Patently-O Bits and Bytes by Juvan Bonni

Patently-O

Jie Fei (Christina) Pan: Supreme Court of Canada Denies Amgen Leave to Appeal Decision Invalidating its Filgrastim Patent (Source: JD Supra). Susan Decker and Matthew Bultman: Apple Sinks ‘Submarine Patent,’ Escapes $308.5 Commentary and Journal Articles: Robin Feldman: Our Patent System is Broken. Duane Morris.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Trending Sources

article thumbnail

Patently-O Bits and Bytes by Juvan Bonni

Patently-O

Josh Norem: Apple Patent Application Envisions a Mac Inside a Keyboard (Source: Extreme Tech). Commentary and Journal Articles: Prof. Landers: The Problem of Design Patents: Representation and Subject Matter Scope (Source: SSRN). Sherkow: Preprint Servers and Patent Prior Art (Source: SSRN). . Source: USPTO.

article thumbnail

Fish Principals Author Intellectual Property & Technology Law Journal Article, “Strategic IP Considerations of Batteries and Energy Storage Solutions”

Fish & Richardson Trademark & Copyright Thoughts

With these technical advances comes an increase in legal activity, including intellectual property (“IP”) filings and litigation. Research and development in the battery industry have led to a notable increase in patent filings at the U.S. Patent Prosecution, Portfolio, and Strategic Patenting Considerations.

article thumbnail

In re Surgisil: Boon, Burden, or Mixed Bag for Patent Applicants and Patentees?

IP Watchdog

Although the “stump” art tool cited as prior art in Surgisil resembled Applicant’s lip implant (see below), the Federal Circuit found that Applicant’s “claim is limited to lip implants and does not cover other articles of manufacture.”