特許番号（数字のみ、コンマ不要）を上の入力ボックスにタイプすると、タイトルが自動補完され、類似特許リストがしたのボックスに表示されます。表示されたリスト上にマウスを持っていくと書誌情報がバルーン表示され、リストをクリックするとUSPTOサイトで特許本体が表示されます。
類似度は・・・どこまでを、類似特許と定義するかによりますね。
まあ、一度試してみてください。
解説記事 (PatentBaristas)
Xyggy
“Our paradigm for search is based on the fundamental idea that search should be item-based not just text-based, and that a query based on items provides substantial advantages and additional information as compared to queries involving only keywords.”
2009年8月27日木曜日
方法特許 米国外における特許責任の制限
CAFC（大法廷）米国外における特許責任を制限
8月19日（水）、CAFC大法廷は、35 U.S.C. § 271(f) は方法クレームには適用しないと判示した。この判決は最高裁判所によるMicrosoft Corp. v. AT&T Corp., 550 U.S. 437 (2007) 判決に従うものであり、先に物議をかもしたCAFCによるUnion Carbide v. Shell Oil Co., 425 F.3d 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (271(f) is directed to “every component of every form of invention” and that the statute is “not limited to physical machines.”) 判決を覆すものである。
この判決によりCAFCは、特許の属地的制限は簡単に反故されるべきものではないとの指針を示した。
(Law.com)
An en banc ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has narrowed the reach of U.S. patent laws covering companies' overseas sales and production.
The Wednesday decision in the closely watched Cardiac Pacemakers Inc. v. St. Jude Medical Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2009) determined that patents for methods or processes are not subject to patent infringement liability if the products are assembled and sold overseas. Patents for products, however, are not exempt.
(PatentlyO)
In an en banc decision, the Federal Circuit has ruled that 35 U.S.C. § 271(f) "does not cover method claims." This decision overturns the controversial 2005 decision in Union Carbide v. Shell Oil Co., 425 F.3d 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2005). The ruling was widely expected based on the Supreme Court's 2007 decision in Microsoft Corp. v. AT&T Corp., 550 U.S. 437 (2007) (holding that "master disks" were not a 271(f) "component" when abroad to be copied and then installed to form a would-be infringing system). In reading Microsoft v. AT&T, the Federal Circuit found "a clear message that the territorial limits of patents should not be lightly breached."
8月19日（水）、CAFC大法廷は、35 U.S.C. § 271(f) は方法クレームには適用しないと判示した。この判決は最高裁判所によるMicrosoft Corp. v. AT&T Corp., 550 U.S. 437 (2007) 判決に従うものであり、先に物議をかもしたCAFCによるUnion Carbide v. Shell Oil Co., 425 F.3d 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (271(f) is directed to “every component of every form of invention” and that the statute is “not limited to physical machines.”) 判決を覆すものである。
この判決によりCAFCは、特許の属地的制限は簡単に反故されるべきものではないとの指針を示した。
(Law.com)
An en banc ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has narrowed the reach of U.S. patent laws covering companies' overseas sales and production.
The Wednesday decision in the closely watched Cardiac Pacemakers Inc. v. St. Jude Medical Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2009) determined that patents for methods or processes are not subject to patent infringement liability if the products are assembled and sold overseas. Patents for products, however, are not exempt.
(PatentlyO)
In an en banc decision, the Federal Circuit has ruled that 35 U.S.C. § 271(f) "does not cover method claims." This decision overturns the controversial 2005 decision in Union Carbide v. Shell Oil Co., 425 F.3d 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2005). The ruling was widely expected based on the Supreme Court's 2007 decision in Microsoft Corp. v. AT&T Corp., 550 U.S. 437 (2007) (holding that "master disks" were not a 271(f) "component" when abroad to be copied and then installed to form a would-be infringing system). In reading Microsoft v. AT&T, the Federal Circuit found "a clear message that the territorial limits of patents should not be lightly breached."
米国 特許事務所ランキング（特許付与数順）
2008年に特許を付与された件数順の米国特許事務所リストがPatentBuddyで公開されています。
クライアントリストも掲載されていますのでどの事務所がどこと結びついているかよくわかります。これらリストに載ってくる米国大手の事務所がいかに外国（日本と韓国）のクライアントと結びついているかがよくわかりますね。
1. Oblon Spivak - 2,853
2. Sughrue Mion - 2,145
3. Oliff & Berridge - 1,958
4. Birch Stewart Kolasch & Birch - 1,622
5. Fitzpatrick Cella - 1,518
6. Staas & Halsey - 1,516
7. McDermott Will & Emery - 1,208
8. Blakely Socoloff - 1,063
9. Harness Dickey & Pierce - 1,023
10. Finnegan Henderson - 916
クライアントリストも掲載されていますのでどの事務所がどこと結びついているかよくわかります。これらリストに載ってくる米国大手の事務所がいかに外国（日本と韓国）のクライアントと結びついているかがよくわかりますね。
1. Oblon Spivak - 2,853
2. Sughrue Mion - 2,145
3. Oliff & Berridge - 1,958
4. Birch Stewart Kolasch & Birch - 1,622
5. Fitzpatrick Cella - 1,518
6. Staas & Halsey - 1,516
7. McDermott Will & Emery - 1,208
8. Blakely Socoloff - 1,063
9. Harness Dickey & Pierce - 1,023
10. Finnegan Henderson - 916
2009年8月26日水曜日
最近のまとめ
記事の更新をだいぶさぼってしまいました。
近頃のめぼしい記事のまとめをアップします。
１．CAFCが記載要件に関し大法廷を開催。かつてCAFCが課した要件が覆される可能性も！
An upcoming en banc rehearing before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has the potential to reverse a written description requirement for patents that the court imposed a dozen years ago. Owners of broadly written patents such as those covering life sciences innovations are watching closely. (Law.com)
Federal Circuit to consider whether a separate written description requirement exists in section 112 (File Wrapper)
Federal Circuit Grants En Banc Review in Ariad v. Lilly (PatentDoc)
Ariad v. Lilly: Federal Circuit Grants En Banc Request to Challenge Written Description Requirement (PatentlyO)
２．特許主体判断の＜仮＞ガイドラインをUSPTOが発行
(1) Is the claim directed to one of the four patent-eligible subject matter categories: process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter?
(2) Does the claim wholly embrace a judicially recognized exception, which includes abstract ideas, mental processes or substantially all practical uses (pre-emption) of a law of nature or a natural phenomenon, or is it a particular practical application of a judicial exception?
Interim Guidelines on Examining Statutory Subject Matter (PatentlyO)
USPTO Publishes Interim Guidelines for Subject Matter Eligibility (271)
USPTO has “Issued” Interim Examination Instructions For “Evaluating” Subject Matter Eligibility (PatentBaristas)
３．新USPTO長官が審査の質に関する指針を審査官に提示
Director Kappos: "Patent quality equals granting those claims the applicant is entitled to under our laws." (PatentlyO)
USPTO Director's Blog (just a patent examiner)
近頃のめぼしい記事のまとめをアップします。
１．CAFCが記載要件に関し大法廷を開催。かつてCAFCが課した要件が覆される可能性も！
An upcoming en banc rehearing before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has the potential to reverse a written description requirement for patents that the court imposed a dozen years ago. Owners of broadly written patents such as those covering life sciences innovations are watching closely. (Law.com)
Federal Circuit to consider whether a separate written description requirement exists in section 112 (File Wrapper)
Federal Circuit Grants En Banc Review in Ariad v. Lilly (PatentDoc)
Ariad v. Lilly: Federal Circuit Grants En Banc Request to Challenge Written Description Requirement (PatentlyO)
２．特許主体判断の＜仮＞ガイドラインをUSPTOが発行
(1) Is the claim directed to one of the four patent-eligible subject matter categories: process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter?
(2) Does the claim wholly embrace a judicially recognized exception, which includes abstract ideas, mental processes or substantially all practical uses (pre-emption) of a law of nature or a natural phenomenon, or is it a particular practical application of a judicial exception?
Interim Guidelines on Examining Statutory Subject Matter (PatentlyO)
USPTO Publishes Interim Guidelines for Subject Matter Eligibility (271)
USPTO has “Issued” Interim Examination Instructions For “Evaluating” Subject Matter Eligibility (PatentBaristas)
３．新USPTO長官が審査の質に関する指針を審査官に提示
Director Kappos: "Patent quality equals granting those claims the applicant is entitled to under our laws." (PatentlyO)
USPTO Director's Blog (just a patent examiner)
2009年8月17日月曜日
倒産した法律事務所の経営者は今？
収入激減でしょうね。
(Law.com)
The 54-year-old former leader of Heller Ehrman was building from the ground up at Dechert, this time with a track record that included the dissolution of his previous firm during his tenure as its chairman. "I'm trying to communicate to the world that I'm back in practice and that this is what I'm good at," Larrabee said. "It's still a work in progress."
（中略）
Lateral movement among attorneys in general has become increasingly common. During the past five years, the number of partners moving from one top firm to another has increased by 14 percent. In 2008, attorneys at Am Law 200 firms made 2,509 moves, according to The American Lawyer, an affiliate of The National Law Journal that tracks partner moves at the nation's most profitable firms. In 2003, lateral moves totaled 2,199.
(Law.com)
The 54-year-old former leader of Heller Ehrman was building from the ground up at Dechert, this time with a track record that included the dissolution of his previous firm during his tenure as its chairman. "I'm trying to communicate to the world that I'm back in practice and that this is what I'm good at," Larrabee said. "It's still a work in progress."
（中略）
Lateral movement among attorneys in general has become increasingly common. During the past five years, the number of partners moving from one top firm to another has increased by 14 percent. In 2008, attorneys at Am Law 200 firms made 2,509 moves, according to The American Lawyer, an affiliate of The National Law Journal that tracks partner moves at the nation's most profitable firms. In 2003, lateral moves totaled 2,199.
2009年8月13日木曜日
雑談 ラップトップと喫茶店
コーヒーを飲みながらノートパソコンのキーボードを叩く、こんな光景がよく見受けられますが、NYでは規制の動きが若干出て来ているようです。
かくいう私も、喫茶店で知財ブログめぐりをしようと、しばらく前にネットPCとデータ通信カードを購入しました。残念ながら田舎暮らしなので近所に無線LANスポットを提供する喫茶店はありません。でも最近のデータ通信は高速だし、ネットサーフィン程度なら十分満足できます。涼しい喫茶店でコーヒーを飲みながらネットサーフィンし、気になる記事を自分のブログにメモするのは至福の時でありますが、不景気はそのささやかな楽しみも奪いつつあるようです。
（NYT)
A sign at Naidre's, a small neighborhood coffee shop in Brooklyn, N.Y., begins warmly: "Dear customers, we are absolutely thrilled that you like us so much that you want to spend the day..."
かくいう私も、喫茶店で知財ブログめぐりをしようと、しばらく前にネットPCとデータ通信カードを購入しました。残念ながら田舎暮らしなので近所に無線LANスポットを提供する喫茶店はありません。でも最近のデータ通信は高速だし、ネットサーフィン程度なら十分満足できます。涼しい喫茶店でコーヒーを飲みながらネットサーフィンし、気になる記事を自分のブログにメモするのは至福の時でありますが、不景気はそのささやかな楽しみも奪いつつあるようです。
（NYT)
A sign at Naidre's, a small neighborhood coffee shop in Brooklyn, N.Y., begins warmly: "Dear customers, we are absolutely thrilled that you like us so much that you want to spend the day..."
But, it continues, "...people gotta eat, and to eat they gotta sit." At Naidre's in Park Slope and its second location in nearby Carroll Gardens, Wi-Fi is free. But since the spring of 2008, no laptops have been allowed between 11 a.m. and 2 p.m. weekdays and 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. weekends, unless the customer is eating and typing at the same time.
2009年8月12日水曜日
米国 不衡平行為の立証
特許侵害訴訟における被告の常套防衛手段である、「特許権者による不衡平行為のため権利行使不能」攻撃のハードルが高くなりました。
Exergen Corp. v. Wal-Mart Stores Inc.（Fed.Cir. 2009)
(Law.com)
A recent U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decision puts the patent bar on notice that vague claims of another lawyer's intent to mislead or withhold data from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office will no longer fly.
(271)
On the inequitable conduct issue, the district court found that SAAT's pleading failed to allege inequitable conduct "with particularity" under Rule 9(b). The pleading, which alleged inequitable conduct over 7 paragraphs, cited specific documents that "Exergen failed to cite", along with examples of "arguments made to the PTO were contradicted by statements from Exergen’s own website."
（中略）
the CAFC agreed with the district court that the allegations were deficient with respect to both the particularity of the facts alleged and the reasonableness of the inference of scienter.
以下は不衡平行為以外の部分に焦点をあてた解説です
(Patent Baristas)
Exergen sued Wal-Mart, CVS, and several thermometer makers (including SAAT) for infringement of three patents covering infrared detecting thermometers. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled that one of the patents was invalid because it is inherently anticipated, and the other two were not infringed.
Exergen Corp. v. Wal-Mart Stores Inc.（Fed.Cir. 2009)
(Law.com)
A recent U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decision puts the patent bar on notice that vague claims of another lawyer's intent to mislead or withhold data from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office will no longer fly.
(271)
On the inequitable conduct issue, the district court found that SAAT's pleading failed to allege inequitable conduct "with particularity" under Rule 9(b). The pleading, which alleged inequitable conduct over 7 paragraphs, cited specific documents that "Exergen failed to cite", along with examples of "arguments made to the PTO were contradicted by statements from Exergen’s own website."
（中略）
the CAFC agreed with the district court that the allegations were deficient with respect to both the particularity of the facts alleged and the reasonableness of the inference of scienter.
以下は不衡平行為以外の部分に焦点をあてた解説です
(Patent Baristas)
Exergen sued Wal-Mart, CVS, and several thermometer makers (including SAAT) for infringement of three patents covering infrared detecting thermometers. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled that one of the patents was invalid because it is inherently anticipated, and the other two were not infringed.
2009年8月11日火曜日
2009年 特許出願数低調傾向
2009年8月10日月曜日
Twitter特許訴訟を提起される
今日、市民だよりを読んでいたところ、市税の滞納者から差し押さえた物品をヤフーオークションを利用した競売システムで競売するという記事がありました。これなら、手軽に差し押さえ物品を競売できるだろうし、便利になったものだと感心しました。
米国のいくつかの地方自治体が公衆への緊急通知手段としてTwitterの使用を検討しているそうです。従来、地方自治体へ緊急通知システムを供給していたTechRadium社がこのことを知り、Twitterの参入を阻止する（または、ロイヤルティーを獲得する）手段として自らが有する２つの特許をTwitterが侵害しているとして訴訟を提起したようです。
Twitterからしたら迷惑な話なような・・・
（LINK)
Twitter Sued on Patent Infringement Allegations
Miriam Rozen Texas Lawyer
August 7, 2009
米国のいくつかの地方自治体が公衆への緊急通知手段としてTwitterの使用を検討しているそうです。従来、地方自治体へ緊急通知システムを供給していたTechRadium社がこのことを知り、Twitterの参入を阻止する（または、ロイヤルティーを獲得する）手段として自らが有する２つの特許をTwitterが侵害しているとして訴訟を提起したようです。
Twitterからしたら迷惑な話なような・・・
（LINK)
Twitter Sued on Patent Infringement Allegations
Miriam Rozen Texas Lawyer
August 7, 2009
登録:
投稿 (Atom)
)
投稿
