December's newsletter focuses on the latest information from LexisNexis IP to help you stay up-to-date with what's happening in Patent Law.
Not rendering correctly? View this email as a web page here.
Welcome to the December issue of the LexisNexis Intellectual Property InfoPro eNewsletter! Each month you'll receive product highlights, research tips, information on podcasts and webinars, and announcements from LexisNexis IP.
Every patent practitioner knows that some examiners allow more patents than others, but most assume that the variability results from some combination of three factors: examiner experience, technology area, and the merits of the applications brought before them. While all three of these factors influences examiner grant rates, they do not tell the whole story of the Examiner Lottery you play for each new application.
Watch this recording to learn the real reasons why some applications are treated differently from others, and what applicants can do about it.
Panelists Gene Quinn, Todd Dickinson and Megan McLoughlin discuss:
What the variability in examiner grant rates look like across the USPTO
What factors influence differences in grant rates
How to optimize prosecution outcomes with this knowledge
Allowance rates and other metrics that focus solely on one patent statistic can be misleading because they fail to consider the circumstances surrounding a patent examiner’s previous decisions. LexisNexis® has developed its proprietary PatentAdvisor ETA™ metric to compensate for the pitfalls of commonly relied-upon patent indicators and to help patent professionals strategize more effectively throughout patent prosecution.
LexisNexis PatentAdvisor® timeline view provides you with an easy look at your application’s prosecution path and shows you how it compares to your examiner’s averages. This lets you quickly see if your application is on par with your examiner in relation to time and number of filings.
Chris talks with Megan about his recent experience deciding how to respond to a first office action. He discovered that his application has ended up with an examiner who has a high ETA (Examiner Time Allowance), indicating a slowness to grant patents. Megan and Chris discuss how the way you would respond to an office action without data can very often be different from the way you might respond with data.
Megan interviews patent attorney Josh Rudawitz about his experience as a patent examiner. Josh discusses his career path at the USPTO and shares valuable insights about the level of autonomy granted to examiners at various points in their careers. Based on his experience working on both sides of the table, Josh shares his advice for patent practitioners.
The Alice/Mayo framework for determining patent eligibility has made it much more difficult to obtain patents in a variety of technology fields, but until recently the futuristic area of artificial intelligence (AI) related innovation was largely spared from dealing with the most difficult of these rejections. Today, however, patent eligibility rejections for inventions claiming advances directed to AI are as common as §101 rejections of business method applications.
Listen as Gene Quinn, patent attorney and founder of IPWatchdog.com, joined by attorneys with Kilpatrick Townsend Kate Gaudry, PhD, and Samuel Hayim, discuss patent eligibility, artificial intelligence, why a decision in Electric Power Group is being used by patent examiners to reject AI patent claims and how patent practitioners can attempt to respond to these patent eligibility rejections.
People are getting smarter about their workouts, and fitness technology is continually improving the way in which we push ourselves. There has been a boom in fitness and wearable technology in recent years, and innovators keep developing new ways to get in that much-needed exercise. Here we discuss two fitness companies who are leveraging their patents to shape the way we shape our bodies.
People need coffee and they need it now. International Business Machine Corporation (IBM) is doing what they can to reduce the number of tired eyes and heavy feet that move about each day. Here is a look at the IBM patent prosecution for coffee drone delivery.