Inventive rodent control?
See Ex parte Endepols concerning application 10/477,480 and a method of removing rodents.
posted by Lawrence B. Ebert at 7:03 PM
Friday, December 28, 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
- Xerox provides no persuasive evidence in Ex parte ...
- Eyewitness identification fails because of identic...
- "Best Exotic Marigold Hotel" theme of outsourcing ...
- Innovation not stifled by current patent system
- Moriguchi cited in Ex parte BARRACLOUGH
- Siemens loses appeal to Board
- Nonfunctional descriptive material discussed in Ex...
- The Board discusses "obvious improvement" in MacKe...
- Obviousness affirmed in Ex parte Karr
- Board affirms obviousness rejection in Ex parte Lim
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home