35 U.S.C. § 154(b)(1)(B)
See discussion at patentdocs on the case Exelixis, Inc. v. Kappos (E.D. Va. 2012) concerning the interpretation of 35 U.S.C. § 154(b)(1)(B).
posted by Lawrence B. Ebert at 3:12 AM
Friday, November 09, 2012
About Me
- Name: Lawrence B. Ebert
I'm a patent lawyer located in central New Jersey. I have a J.D. from the University of Chicago and a Ph.D. from Stanford University, where I studied graphite intercalation compounds at the Center for Materials Research. I worked at Exxon Corporate Research in areas ranging from engine deposits through coal and petroleum to fullerenes. An article that I wrote in The Trademark Reporter, 1994, 84, 379-407 on color trademarks was cited by Supreme Court in Qualitex v. Jacobson, 514 US 159 (1995) and the methodology was adopted in the Capri case in N.D. Ill. An article that I wrote on DNA profiling was cited by the Colorado Supreme Court (Shreck case) and a Florida appellate court (Brim case). I was interviewed by NHK-TV about the Jan-Hendrik Schon affair. I am developing ipABC, an entity that combines rigorous IP analytics with study of business models, to optimize utilization of intellectual property. I can be reached at C8AsF5 at yahoo.com.
Previous Posts
- Hewlett-Packard loses appeal in Ex parte Zhou
- Examiner's obviousness rejection not sustained in ...
- Atlas and Best cited in Ex parte PETEREIT
- Computerized translation of Japanese patent document
- Procter & Gamble strung out by Board on --“a color...
- Thibault case discussed by Board in GM appeal
- "Result effective variable"
- The Board discusses "teaching away" in Ex parte Di...
- “Diesel could put Clostridium back in business"
- Bridgewater, NJ entering the Third World?
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home