Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
In the April issue of The Intellectual Property Strategist, we detailed a growing rift in the Federal Circuit regarding the issue of patentable subject matter, and pondered whether the Supreme Court would resolve this issue when it came out with its decision in Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc., No. 10-1150. We did not have to wait long, as the decision was issued on March 20. The Supreme Court held that a method claim that does nothing more than restate a law of nature and add conventional steps cannot be patentable. At first glance, this may not sound remarkable, but upon closer inspection this holding has the potential to dramatically change patent law for decades to come.
In Bilski, the rejection of the claims at issue was unanimous, but the Court was deeply divided in its reasoning and came within a single vote of categorically eliminating business methods from the scope of patentable subject matter. Bilski v. Kappos, 561 U.S. __, 130 S. Ct. 3218 (2010). In Mayo, the Court spoke with one voice, with no Justice submitting a separate concurring opinion. As we head toward the middle of 2012, we have not only the Mayo and Bilski opinions on patentability, but also recently enacted patent reform hailed as the most significant in 50 years (the America Invents Act or AIA, signed into law in September 2011) as well as numerous guidelines and proposed rules set forth by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”). Yet even with all three branches of government having spoken directly on the issue, we astonishingly still do not have clear guidance for how to determine whether a method claim is patent-eligible. How is that possible? We examine these developments in turn to find out.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
There's current litigation in the ongoing Beach Boys litigation saga. A lawsuit filed in 2019 against Nevada residents Mike Love and his wife Jacquelyne in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada that alleges inaccurate payment by the Loves under the retainer agreement and seeks $84.5 million in damages.
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
The real property transfer tax does not apply to all leases, and understanding the tax rules of the applicable jurisdiction can allow parties to plan ahead to avoid unnecessary tax liability.