Anticipate This!™ | Patent and Trademark Law Blog

Robert Bunsen (March 30, 1811 – August 16, 1899).

Posted in Science and Technology by Jake Ward on March 31, 2011

As observed by this recent Doodle at the Google website, March 30, 2011 marked 200 years since the birth of notable German chemist Robert Bunsen.  If the name sounds familiar, those of you who remember chemistry from high school or college might recall the Bunsen burner (pictured above).  Happy Birthday, Robert Bunsen!

Live Blogging from 2011 Sughrue Symposium on IP Law in Akron, Ohio.

Posted in General Commentary by Jake Ward on March 21, 2011

We are attending the 2011 Sughrue Symposium on Intellectual Property Law and Policy today.  The Symposium is co-sponsored by The University of Akron School of Law and Sughrue Mion, PLLC, and has been offered on an annual basis for the past 13 years.

We have attended the Symposium in the past, and have always found it to be very instructive.  This year’s Symposium is certainly living up to our expectations.  An excellent review of U.S. Patent Law developments in 2010, including recent  Supreme Court and CAFC decisions, was provided in the first presentation by Donald Chisum.  Robert Clarida (partner at the law firm of Cowan, Liebowitz & Latman, P.C.) has also just completed an informative, and highly entertaining, review of Copyright Law in 2009-2010.

If you happen to see us at the Symposium, feel free to say “hi” and let us know your thoughts on this year’s presentations, or IP law developments in general!

JW Update 2:15PM:

The Symposium is proving to be excellent, per usual.  A very good panel prior to the lunch break including Paul Michel, Chief Circuit Judge (Retired), and Marybeth Peters, Register of Copyrights (Retired).  Being recently retired, both Judge Michel and Ms. Peters had the freedom to exercise their 1st Amendment rights and speak their minds on the state of IP law. 

With reference to patent law, in particular, Judge Michel predicts that patent legislation, at least in a limited form, will be enacted in this term.  He believes that first-to-file and at least some form of new post-grant review will be part of the final legislation to be signed into law, but that fee diversion at the USPTO may not be.  Judge Michel’s strongest statements, however, were reserved for the SCOTUS.  Paraphrased, he opined that the vast majority, if not all, of the Supreme Court justices are anti-patent for one reason or another. Judge Michel also believes that the SCOTUS will likely weaken the presumption of validity in case of Microsoft Corporation v. i4i Limited Partnership, presently before the court.

The featured speaker at lunch was Robert Bahr, Associate Commissioner for Patent Examination Policy, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO).  Mr. Bahr gave a good overview of various on-goings at the USPTO, including the guidance that has been provided to Examiners relating to the Bilski opinion, and the proposed Three Track Program.

They Invented What? (No. 198)

Posted in They Invented What? by Jake Ward on March 17, 2011

U.S. Pat. No. 7,178,930:  Illuminating necklace.

JW Note:  Wishing you a Safe and Happy Saint Patrick’s Day 2011.

The invention claimed is:

1. An illuminated necklace, comprising:
          a plurality of ornamental lamp fixtures, an elongated flexible support member, said elongated flexible support member adapted for attachment to at least some of said plurality of ornamental lamp fixtures at selected spaced apart distances therebetween;
          at least some of said ornamental lamp fixtures further comprising at least one light emitting device located therein, each one of said light emitting devices comprising a pair of conductive elements extending therefrom, and wherein each of said ornamental lamp fixtures further comprising at least one light emitting device is not affixed to said elongated flexible support member;
          at least some of said ornamental lamp fixtures not including a light emitting device, said at least some of said ornamental lamp fixtures not including a light emitting device further comprising an attachment base, said elongated flexible support member secured to said attachment base;
           a pair of flexible electrical conductors, said pair of flexible conductors co-extensive with said elongated flexible support member, said pair of flexible conductors electrically attached to each pair of conductive elements of each of said at least one light emitting device, and said pair of flexible electrical conductors looping around said flexible support member, and bypassing all of the at least some ornamental lamp fixtures not including a light emitting device, said pair of electrical conductors arranged to supply power in parallel to each one of said light emitting devices;
          a battery housing, said battery housing comprising a positive battery contact and a negative battery contact and containing a battery;
          an electrical power switching circuit, said electrical power switching circuit intermittently energizing and de-energizing differential voltage between said pair of flexible electrical conductors, to energize and de-energize each of said light emitting devices, so that a blinking illuminated necklace is provided, and wherein each of said ornamental lamp fixtures comprises a fixture body, and wherein each of said lamp fixture bodies has a similar size and shape.

(more…)

They Invented What? (No. 197)

Posted in They Invented What? by Jake Ward on March 14, 2011

U.S. Pat. No. 2,294,569: Pie slice lifter.

JW Note:  In honor of Pi Day.  We hope you remember to celebrate on time (3/14 at 1:59 PM . . . Einstein’s Birthday).

Having thus described the invention, what is claimed is:

1. A pie slice lifter, comprising a substantially triangular blade, a handle connected to one of the straight edges of the blade at a point offset with respect to a line drawn transversely through the center of the edge of the blade to which the handle is connected.

(more…)

They Invented What? (No. 196)

Posted in They Invented What? by Jake Ward on March 8, 2011

U.S. Pat. No. 3,458,188:  Dance belts with detachable elastic joining members.

What is claimed is:

1. In combination, a pair of dance belts, each belt comprising an elongated rectangular shaped fabric body looped at one end and tapered at its other end, a rectangular buckle hingedly mounted on the looped end of the body, the tapered end having spaced aligned holes therein for selectively receiving a hook carried by the buckle, and a device on the body adjacent each end thereof for removably attaching an elongated elastic member; and a pair of elongated elastic members, each round in cross-section, and each detachably attached at one end to one of said devices on one belt and detachably attached at the other end to one of said devices on the other belt.

(more…)

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 667 other followers