"Much ink has been spilt over the chaos that is the law of patent eligibility in the United States, and rightfully so. Having said that, the Alice/Mayo problems that many applicants face have been confined primarily to a certain limited number of Art Units in the biotechnology and computer software areas," says Gene Quinn, founder of IPWatchdog.com
As the United States Patent and Trademark Office continues its efforts to increase patent quality, a great deal of emphasis is being placed on the disclosure of technologies in the specification, which is an issue that all patent applicants face. Still further, the use of certain claiming techniques continue to be the subject of scrutiny in the Federal Circuit in the wake of never ending Supreme Court scrutiny of the patent system.
Join us on Thursday, September 7 at 2:00 PM ET for a wide-ranging discussion on the issue surrounding 35 U.S.C. 112. We will discuss:
Leading the webinar is Gene Quinn, founder of IPWatchdog.com and Robert Schaffer, intellectual property partner at Troutman Sanders.
Gene Quinn is the founder of IPWatchdog.com, a patent attorney, law professor, and leading commentator on patent law and innovation policy. Gene’s writings typically focus on pending legislation, rule making at the United States Patent and Trademark Office, and general commentary about the state of the industry. Gene practices patent law with Widerman Malek, and the majority of his patent practice is focused on software patents and Internet innovations. Since 2000 he has also been a principal lecturer in the PLI Patent Bar Review Course.
Robert Schaffer is an intellectual property partner at Troutman Sanders. Bob applies more than 30 years of experience to IP counseling and litigation. His work includes patent procurement, strategic planning and transactional advice, due diligence investigations, district court patent cases, and Federal Circuit appeals. He regularly handles complex and high-profile domestic and international patent portfolios, intellectual property agreements and licensing, IP evaluations for collaborations, mergers, and acquisitions. In disputed court cases Bob’s work includes representing and counseling client in ANDA litigations, complex patent infringement cases and appeals, and multidistrict and international cases. In disputed Patent Office matters his work includes representing and counseling clients in interferences, reexaminations, reissues, post-grant proceedings, and in European Oppositions. Bob’s clients include biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies, computer software companies, new media firms, major U.S. and foreign corporations, start-ups and high-technology ventures