Patent Prosecution Archives - Jafari Law Group | California Employment Litigation & Patent Lawyers

How Much Is Your Patent Worth?

March 12 2021

When most people want to file a patent, they do so with one major goal in mind: making money—or at least, protecting their idea from OTHERS making money off of it! Patents can range from obscure, niche applications that may never be used, to schematics and designs of products that can and will change the …

Continue reading “How Much Is Your Patent Worth?”

Public performance under the Copyright Act

November 16 2014

This past summer the Supreme Court ruled against Aereo, Inc. in the case of American Broadcasting Companies, Inc. v. Aereo, Inc.[1] The decision hinged on the meaning behind two critical terms of the Copyright Act (17 U.S.C.): “perform” and “publicly”. The Court first had to decide whether the actions by Aereo constitute a performance as …

Continue reading “Public performance under the Copyright Act”

Message to Patent Trolls: Lose & You Will Pay Attorney’s Fees

November 04 2014

The American system is unlike many others when it comes to paying the attorney’s fees of the winner in litigation. Patent cases have always been a little different in that the relevant statutes allowed for the district court judge to consider a fee motion in favor of the winner in a patent infringement suit. Until …

Continue reading “Message to Patent Trolls: Lose & You Will Pay Attorney’s Fees”

Buysafe, Inc. v. Google, Inc.- Another Business Method Patent Invalidated

September 05 2014

On September 3, 2014, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a lower court’s finding that the claims to a patent owned by buySAFE, Inc. are invalid under 35 U.S.C. section 101. Perhaps more significantly, the Court of Appeals used the approach recently affirmed by the United States Supreme Court in …

Continue reading “Buysafe, Inc. v. Google, Inc.- Another Business Method Patent Invalidated”

Markush Claims – What Are They, When Should I Use One, and How Do I Use One?

June 04 2014

While many diverse areas of patent law are important to practicing competently, it is the claims which share center stage. It is the claims which define and carve out the scope of the invention. During the patent prosecution phase, it is the claims which are fought over. And again during patent infringement suits, it is …

Continue reading “Markush Claims – What Are They, When Should I Use One, and How Do I Use One?”

Amazon's Anticipatory Shipping Patent Explained

February 25 2014

At the tail end of 2013, Amazon (AMZN) obtained issuance of an interesting patent, claiming a system and method of anticipatory shipping, i.e. shipping one or more items in your general direction before you even purchase said items. The patent, entitled “Method and system for anticipatory package shipping,” can be read here. Of my own …

Continue reading “Amazon's Anticipatory Shipping Patent Explained”

Office Actions – What Are They and Why You Need a Professional to Respond

November 07 2013

Patent practitioners refer to communications regarding a successfully filed patent application from the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) Office that require the patent applicant to respond as an “Office Action.” A successfully filed patent application is one that has received a filing date from the USPTO. Further, patent practitioners actually only refer to …

Continue reading “Office Actions – What Are They and Why You Need a Professional to Respond”

Design Patents – Yes They Are Available in the United States and Yes You Should Consider Filing for One

November 05 2013

When most people talk of patents and protecting their inventions they are implicitly talking about “utility patents,” which protect the way an invention works. However, there is an entirely different class of patent, the “design patent,” that United States patent law recognizes and that those seeking a patent should also consider. The Differences… First, the …

Continue reading “Design Patents – Yes They Are Available in the United States and Yes You Should Consider Filing for One”

Synthes USA LLV v. Spinal Kinetics, Inc.: Broadened Claims Not Supported by Description

November 04 2013

When done correctly, broadening the claims allows a patent owner to broaden the scope of the patent in order to capture design-arounds or perhaps new products, which are not covered by the previous claims. While it is proper to broaden the scope of a patent under certain circumstances and procedures, the broadened claims must be …

Continue reading “Synthes USA LLV v. Spinal Kinetics, Inc.: Broadened Claims Not Supported by Description”

Patent Search- What is A Search and Why it Makes Sense to Perform One

October 28 2013

In the context of obtaining a patent, a “search” is a professional search of various online databases for inventions that are similar to your invention. The name of such searches varies within our industry, but at our office we simply call such searches a “Patent Search,” and is also often called a novelty search. Patent …

Continue reading “Patent Search- What is A Search and Why it Makes Sense to Perform One”

Ibormeith IP, LLC v. Mercedes-Benz USA

October 27 2013

Ibormeith IP, LLC, a company owning the patent rights to technologies in the automotive industry, was assigned a patent on some really neat safety features for automobiles- a monitoring device to alert drivers that may be falling asleep. Due to an inadequate disclosure in the patent’s specification, however, Ibormeith recently lost its claim for patent …

Continue reading “Ibormeith IP, LLC v. Mercedes-Benz USA”

Missing Parts Pilot Program Extended to December 31, 2013

October 25 2013

The value of this program for the small inventor with an eye on the budget is tremendous. The program is best explained by an example. First, I will explain the patent application filing costs at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) without this program.* Take small inventor Mark, who qualifies as a “micro-entity.” …

Continue reading “Missing Parts Pilot Program Extended to December 31, 2013”

IP Now