The #USPTO is seeking comments from the public regarding the impact of patent eligibility jurisprudence in the United States since the Supreme Court’s 2016 decisions in Mayo and Alice and subsequent Federal Circuit decisions applying the Supreme Court’s legal framework.
The USPTO will use the responses to prepare a report on how current jurisprudence may have affected U.S. investment and innovation.
William Morriss, the cofounder of IP Toolworks, answers some of the questions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Important Highlights
00:37 Impact of jurisprudence on investment and innovation
05:19 3 pages of obviousness and 15 pages of eligibility
08:48 Ability to obtain financing from investors or financial institutions
Watch the video and share your opinions around the questions in the comment section.
#Section101 #Patent #Eligibility #PatentRejections #SoftwarePatents
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Links:
Patent Eligibility Jurisprudence Study
[ Ссылка ]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How to Write a Winning Patent Office Action Response | USPTO
[ Ссылка ]
5 Anti-Alice Arguments from Responses that Worked
[ Ссылка ]
Office Action Responses | MPEP VS Arguminer | Book VS Practical Guide
[ Ссылка ]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
At IP Toolworks, we created the Arguminer software to allow you to quickly search and analyze publicly available file wrappers. You can find successful responses prepared by other attorneys that match your examiner, rejection type, or other criteria unique to the office action you are responding to.
Get on a demo session now: [ Ссылка ]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
00:20 Patent eligibility jurisprudence study by the USPTO
00:37 Impact of jurisprudence on investment and innovation
01:35 Impact in the United States
02:45 Using the Arguminer software
05:19 3 pages of obviousness and 15 pages of eligibility
05:50 Innovation is absolutely secondary
06:21 Writing such a detailed well-thought-out response is costly
06:48 Section 101 places a premium on legal argumentation
07:10 Elevates draftsman and lawyer’s work over innovator’s work
07:46 The design choice is reasonably intuitive
08:18 Innovators lack knowledge about updated eligibility guidance (2019)
08:38 Increased cost, increased uncertainty, and more emphasis on the legal side than on innovation
08:48 Ability to obtain financing from investors or financial institutions
09:40 Getting investment in the technologies dealing with section 101 is difficult
10:13 How the current state of patent eligibility jurisprudence in the United States affects the public
10:44 Decreases the availability and increases the cost of software-implemented inventions
12:48 Current eligibility jurisprudence discourages public from meaningfully engaging with the patent system
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer: The statements and views expressed in this posting are my own and do not reflect those of my law firm, are intended for general informational purposes only, and do not constitute legal advice or a legal opinion.
