Appellants in Oehlerking win on 101, but lose on 103
In a business method case, appellants prevailed on a 101 rejection, but all claims were deemed obvious under 103.
posted by Lawrence B. Ebert at 10:35 AM
Friday, August 09, 2013
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
- PTAB discusses Bilski, 35 USC 101 in Ex parte Maca...
- Rembrandt v. Johnson & Johnson
- THE RESEARCH FOUNDATION OF STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW...
- Apple v. ITC
- Cheese making studied in Cheese Systems v Tetra Pa...
- Written description analyzed in 3M Innovative Prop...
- Valero pulls out of Mascoma project
- Overreaching in patent claims dooms Gevo in distri...
- Unexpected results arguments fail in Ex parte Hart...
- Examiner affirmed in de Heer
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home