Categories
Archives
Receive Email Updates
-
-
-
Certified Licensing Professionals, Inc., 2021 
Disclaimer
This blog, Patents4Life, does not contain legal advice and is for informational purposes only. Its publication does not create an attorney-client relationship nor is it a solicitation for business. This is the personal blog of Warren Woessner and does not reflect the views of Schwegman Lundberg & Woessner, or any of its attorneys or staff. To the best of his ability, the Author provides current and accurate information at the time of each post, however, readers should check for current information and accuracy.
-
- About Me
Warren D. Woessner
Pages
Archives
Author Archives: Warren Woessner
David Kappos and The Impact of KSR – A Unique Opportunity For Our Profession
By Paul Cole Visiting Professor, Intellectual Property Law, Bournemouth University, UK On Tuesday 24 November, David Kappos made a posting on the Director’s Forum including the following statement: Some have suggested that the Office is determining obviousness in a way … Continue reading
A Look Back at the Roots of the Thorny WDR Problem
As the date for oral argument looms in Ariad v. Lilly, as does an en banc decision as to the existence and/or the role of the written description requirement (WDR) in Section 112, I thought it would be worthwhile to … Continue reading
Posted in Written Description Requirements (WDR)
Tagged Ariad, Ariad v. Lilly, ENZO, Federal Circuit, Judge Rader, Lilly, Patent Law, Warren Woessner, WDR
2 Comments
POST FROM AUSTRALIA – NON-ENGLISH LANGUAGE PUBLICATIONS MAY NOT BE CITABLE ART.
By Bill Bennett, Pizzeys, Canberra, AU A unique aspect of Australian Patent Law is the requirement that a reference must be “reasonably ascertained, understood and regarded as relevant” by the hypothetical skilled person before it can be applied in an … Continue reading
Posted in Non-U.S. Practice
Tagged Australia, Bill Bennett, citable art, intellectual property, Patent Law, Pizzeys, Warren Woessner
Leave a comment
"LOOKS BAD FOR BUSINESS METHODS" — A note by Erwin J. Basinski
The Bilski case before the US Supreme Court came up for oral argument on November 9. After a couple of reads, My initial impressions are: 1. Most of the questions from the Justices (primarily Scalia, Breyer, Roberts, Sotomeyor, Stevens, Kennedy, … Continue reading
Posted in Patenting Methods/Processes
Tagged Basinski, Bilski, business methods, Patent Law, Supreme Court
Leave a comment