<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>IPWatchdog.com &#124; Patents &#38; Patent Law &#187; USPTO</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.ipwatchdog.com/tag/uspto/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.ipwatchdog.com</link>
	<description>Patents, Software Patents, Patent Applications &#38; Patent Law</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 May 2013 20:52:32 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>USPTO Modifies After Final Amendment Pilot Program</title>
		<link>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/05/21/uspto-modifies-after-final-amendment-pilot-program/id=40640/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/05/21/uspto-modifies-after-final-amendment-pilot-program/id=40640/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 May 2013 18:04:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Gene Quinn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Gene Quinn]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IP News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IPWatchdog.com Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Fools™]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Prosecution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USPTO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AFCP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AFCP 2.0]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[final rejection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent examiner]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent examiners]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent office]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent prosecution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pilot program]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rce]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[request for continued examination]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ipwatchdog.com/?p=40640</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Last week the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) announced in the Federal Register that it would modified the After Final Consideration Pilot Program (AFCP) to create the After Final Consideration Pilot Program 2.0 (AFCP 2.0). The goal of AFCP 2.0 is much the same as it was when the USPTO initially introduced the precursor AFCP. According to the USPTO, the goal of AFCP 2.0 is to reduce pendency by reducing the number of RCEs and encouraging increased collaboration between the applicant and the examiner to effectively advance the prosecution of the application. There are, however, three differences between old and new AFCP.<div class='yarpp-related-rss'>

Related posts:<ol>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2012/04/02/new-pto-initiative-gives-more-opportunities-to-amend-after-final/id=23753/' rel='bookmark' title='New PTO Initiative Gives More Opportunities to Amend After Final'>New PTO Initiative Gives More Opportunities to Amend After Final</a><small>All and all this seems like a positive development. If you do provide a claim set that defines the invention from broad to narrow it seems extremely likely that at least some claims could be obtained in a case given that amendments can now be filed if they place the application in condition for allowance by adding one or more new limitations that require only a limited amount of further consideration or search. Assuming that the Patent Examiners do search the disclosure, like they are supposed to, and not just the initial claim set, allowable matter should be present and...</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2012/06/20/uspto-extends-after-final-pilot-uspto-adds-advancement-of-examination-option-to-law-school-clinic-program/id=25685/' rel='bookmark' title='USPTO Extends After Final Pilot; USPTO Adds Advancement of Examination Option to Law School Clinic Program'>USPTO Extends After Final Pilot; USPTO Adds Advancement of Examination Option to Law School Clinic Program</a><small>If you have not tried to use the After Final Pilot you should really give it a try. At our firm we have found examiners quite willing to work with us After Final under the Pilot Program and have had successful results. While not appropriate to do everything you really may want to do After Final, many times you can make at least some substantive changes that would have normally required the filing of an RCE or Continuation. I personally think the Pilot has already proven to be a success and hope that the USPTO will continue to extend the...</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2012/05/10/uspto-introduces-quick-path-ids-submission-pilot-program/id=24793/' rel='bookmark' title='USPTO Introduces Quick Path IDS Submission Pilot Program'>USPTO Introduces Quick Path IDS Submission Pilot Program</a><small>In the QPIDS pilot, IDS submissions will be considered by the examiner before determining whether prosecution should be reopened. Prosecution will only be reopened where the examiner determines that reopening prosecution is necessary to address an item of information in the IDS. When the items of information in the IDS do not require prosecution to be reopened, the application will return to issue, thereby eliminating the delays and costs associated with RCE practice....</small></li>
</ol>

Related posts brought to you by <a href='http://yarpp.org'>Yet Another Related Posts Plugin</a>.
</div>
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/05/21/uspto-modifies-after-final-amendment-pilot-program/id=40640/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Patent Statistics and SPEs: Looking Beyond PAIR Data</title>
		<link>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/05/17/patent-statistics-and-spes-looking-beyond-pair-data/id=40452/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/05/17/patent-statistics-and-spes-looking-beyond-pair-data/id=40452/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 May 2013 11:55:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Gene Quinn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Gene Quinn]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IP News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IPWatchdog.com Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Fools™]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USPTO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent examiner]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent examiners]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent statistics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[spe]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[statistics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[supervisory patent examiners]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ipwatchdog.com/?p=40452</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I wrote something incorrect about SPE Len Tran and for that I apologize to him and to the USPTO and to readers who were lead astray. The fact is that if you do a simple Google patent search you will see that since the time he became a SPE in 2008 he has signed many hundreds of patents. SPE Len Tran is not an examiner or SPE that refuses to issue patents. To the contrary, he has issued many patents for a variety of different technologies and seems to be an example of a good supervisor.<div class='yarpp-related-rss'>

Related posts:<ol>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/05/01/patent-attorney-asks-examiner-are-you-drunk/id=39894/' rel='bookmark' title='Patent Attorney Asks Examiner &#8220;Are you drunk?&#8221;'>Patent Attorney Asks Examiner &#8220;Are you drunk?&#8221;</a><small>Are you drunk? No, seriously... are you drinking scotch and whiskey with a side of crack cocaine while you "examine" patent applications? (Heavy emphasis on the quotes.) Do you just mail merge rejection letters from your home? Is that what taxpayers are getting in exchange for your services? Have you even read the patent application? I'm curious. Because you either haven't read the patent application or are... (I don't want to say the "R" word) "Special."...</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/01/02/patentcore-joins-forces-with-lexisnexis-on-patent-advisor/id=32644/' rel='bookmark' title='PatentCore Joins Forces with LexisNexis® on Patent Advisor™'>PatentCore Joins Forces with LexisNexis® on Patent Advisor™</a><small>Reed Technology and Information Services Inc., a part of the LexisNexis® family and a provider of content management services, announced earlier today that it has joined forces with PatentCore. You may recall that PatentCore is a publisher of online Patent Office analytics, which for the first time has given the patent bar and public a snapshot look at what goes on inside the Patent Office Art Unit by Art Unit and patent examiner by patent examiner....</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2012/03/07/a-patent-bigfoot-the-mythical-first-action-allowances-do-exist/id=22628/' rel='bookmark' title='A Patent Bigfoot? The Mythical First Action Allowances DO Exist!'>A Patent Bigfoot? The Mythical First Action Allowances DO Exist!</a><small>Top 50 Law Firms with the most first action allowances according to PatentCore data. But where are these first action allowances coming from? All over the Patent Office really. They occur with plants (1661), organic compounds (1621, 1625, 1626), batteries (1725), active solid state devices (2818), electrical generators or motors (2834), optical systems and elements (2873), optics measuring and testing (2877), vehicle fenders (3612), data processing (3661), aeronautics and astronautics (3662), internal combustion engines (3748), valves (3751, 3753) and elsewhere throughout the USPTO....</small></li>
</ol>

Related posts brought to you by <a href='http://yarpp.org'>Yet Another Related Posts Plugin</a>.
</div>
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/05/17/patent-statistics-and-spes-looking-beyond-pair-data/id=40452/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>8</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A Patient-Centric Look At Gene Patents</title>
		<link>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/05/09/a-patient-centric-look-at-gene-patents-2/id=40119/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/05/09/a-patient-centric-look-at-gene-patents-2/id=40119/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 May 2013 16:22:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Benjamin Jackson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Gene Patents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Guest Contributors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IP News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IPWatchdog.com Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Fools™]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USPTO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gene Patent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Guest Contributor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[myriad genetics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patents]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ipwatchdog.com/?p=40119</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[One of the central policy issues injected into the current case of AMP v. Myriad Genetics is whether the BRCA patents are good for innovation and ultimately for patients.  Specifically, ACLU and PubPat allege that the patents have hindered research, blocked innovation, and harmed patient access to BRCA testing.  No matter how many times these allegations are repeated, all available evidence shows concerns over research and innovation to be unfounded.  More importantly, two natural experiments give us an opportunity to evaluate actual patient access to testing, the ultimate measure of whether the patents are doing their job of incentivizing delivery of new technology to the public.  Both of these experiments show that exclusive licensing of strong “gene patents” not only does not harm patient access to quality testing, but is instead vital to it.
In the impassioned words of Linda Bruzzone, a Lynch syndrome mutation carrier and head of Lynch Syndrome International:  “Many of us with Lynch Syndrome wish there had been a patent in place for us. It would have protected us and perhaps protected the lives of our loved ones.”  L. Bruzzone, Oral Comments at USPTO Public Roundtable on Genetic Diagnostic Testing (January 10, 2013), available at http://www.uspto.gov/aia_implementation/uspto_genetic_testing_roundtable_transcript20130110.pdf. 
If There Really Was a Problem, Shouldn’t We Have Seen Something by Now?
Commentators have expressed concern about so-called “gene patents” from the beginning.  Perhaps the most popular theory underlying opposition to gene patents is the “tragedy of the anticommons” proposed by Michael Heller in 1998.  The theory essentially goes as follows: 
In an anticommons, by my definition, multiple owners are each endowed with the fight to exclude others from a scarce resource, and no one has an effective privilege of use. When there are too many owners holding rights of exclusion, the resource is prone to underuse -- a tragedy of the anticommons.
Heller, The Tragedy of the Anticommons: Property in the Transiton from Marx to Markets, 111 HARVARD LAW REV. 621 (1998).
Heller and Rebecca Eisenberg attempted to apply this new theory of the anticommons to biomedical research, with particular emphasis on DNA patents.  See Heller &#038; Eisenberg, Can Patents Deter Innovation? The Anticommons in Biomedical Research, 280 SCIENCE 698 (1998).  This article caused quite a stir in the academic community, with numerous authors parroting the theory and, most problematic, presenting the “tragedy” as specifically applied to gene patents as a fact.
More recently, those studying biomedical innovation have begun to amass an impressive body of research showing there is no anticommons at all.  For example, a 2005 study found that researchers rarely worried about patents and patents caused no project abandonments.  Walsh et al., View from the Bench: Patents and Material Transfers, 309 SCIENCE 2002 (2005) (“[O]f 381 academic scientists, even including the 10% who claimed to be doing drug development or related downstream work, none were stopped by the existence of third-party patents, and even modifications or delays were rare, each affecting around 1% of our sample.”).  A 2007 study found “[v]ery little evidence of an ‘anticommons problem.’”  Am. Ass’n. for the Advancement of Sci., International Intellectual Property Experiences: A Report of Four Countries 23, at p.12 (2007).  The list goes on and the evidence is mounting: “[T]here is at present no strong evidence that the ‘anti-commons’ concern has had a major impact on the research community.”  Caulfield, Human Gene Patents: Proof of Problems, 84 CHICAGO-KENT L. R. 133, 136 (2009).
A careful review of the original Heller &#038; Eisenberg article makes these findings unsurprising.  While gene patent opponents co-opted the Heller &#038; Eisenberg paper as the primary theoretical basis for their claims of harm, the paper explicitly contrasted patents directed to fully characterized genes (which would clearly include Myriad’s) against patents to uncharacterized gene fragments (i.e., expressed sequence tags or ESTs).  In fact, Heller &#038; Eisenberg appeared to accept as unproblematic “patents on genes generally correspond[ing] closely to foreseeable commercial products, such as therapeutic proteins or diagnostic tests for recognized genetic diseases.”  Heller &#038; Eisenberg at 699 (emphasis added).  It was the NIH’s practice of patenting numerous ESTs, with no discernible function but which might incidentally cover an unforeseeable product, that for Heller &#038; Eisenberg introduced the possibility of an anticommons.  They were essentially worried about an EST thicket (which never materialized).
The recent findings of a lack of any anticommons effect have led some commentators to push back against the impassioned calls for, e.g., bans on gene patents.  “Surely, if patents caused a problem warranting immediate policy action, there would be some clear, discernible effect.”  Caulfield at 138.  As noted by Christopher Holman:
The paucity of documented examples in which the fears surrounding gene patents have manifested themselves is striking, particularly when one considers the high level of public concern and the extraordinary nature of the proposed legislative fix.
Holman, The Impact of Human Gene Patents on Innovation and Access: A Survey of Human Gene Patent Litigation, 76 UKMC L.R. 295, 300 (2006).  In other words, if there really was a pernicious problem as ACLU and others claim, shouldn’t we have seen something by now?  
Patents Incentivize Investment in and Commitment to Translation From Basic Discovery to Commercial Availability
The absence of any evidence of a systemic problem should be enough to dismiss claims of harm caused by gene patents.  But some simply cannot let go of the theory on which they built their ideological case against gene patents.  Unfortunately for the misguided attack on gene patents, even the supposed epitome of what is wrong with gene patents turns out to instead be a brilliant example of what is right.
Many gene patent opponents focus on the initial discovery of the BRCA genes and invention of isolated BRCA-related DNA molecules, arguing it would have happened with or without Myriad.    But for those who take the long-view and are genuinely concerned about actual patient access to life-saving technologies more than theories, the whole inquiry is irrelevant.  The real question is whether, without the patents, the basic science discovery would have been successfully translated into a widely-available, quality product for patients.
First, a quick look at Myriad’s efforts and struggles to deliver the gold standard in genetic sequencing to as many patients as possible.  Myriad has invested over $500M in developing and refining its BRACAnalysis® product and, more importantly, in raising physician, patient, medical society, and insurance company awareness of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) syndrome.  A recent study found that such investment in public awareness for genetic tests that are non-exclusively licensed does not happen:
In the context of breast cancer testing, Myriad has a strong incentive to “get the word out” about genetic testing for inherited risk of breast cancer.  This incentive is stronger for BRCA testing, for which Myriad is sole US provider, than for colon cancer testing, where there are alternative providers.  […]  The social benefit from this incentive is more public knowledge of test availability.
Cook-Deegan et al., Impact of gene patents and licensing practices on access to genetic testing for inherited susceptibility to cancer: Comparing breast and ovarian cancers with colon cancers, GENET. MED. (2010) 12:S15-38.
It took 17 years before Myriad finally broke even and became a profitable company.  Myriad has spent years and millions of dollars collaborating with hundreds of researchers studying the BRCA genes and has performed tens of thousands of free tests to establish the clinical importance of BRCA testing.  As result of this investment, numerous medical societies have clear, well-validated guidelines on who should get tested and virtually all major private and public payors reimburse BRACAnalysis® testing (such that the average out of pocket cost to patients is less than $100.).  Further, Myriad has generous programs to help uninsured and underinsured patients get affordable access to BRCA testing.
It wasn’t just a monetary investment that the patents spurred; Myriad’s commitment goes much deeper than money.  For example, many in the mid- to late-1990s actually opposed widespread clinical testing of the BRCA genes.  As reported in a 1999 article in Reason Magazine, 
[A] 53-member panel of ethicists and lawyers chaired by Stanford University law professor Henry Greely [declared] “The test for BRCA1 should be confined to the research setting.” […] The ethics panel advised women not to take the commercial test for BRCA1….
[…]
Francis Collins, the director of the Human Genome Project, agreed in U.S. Senate testimony in 1996 that the BRCA1 test should not be commercially available to women. According to Collins, the information that a woman might get from such a test is “toxic.”
Bailey, Warning: Bioethics May Be Hazardous to Your Health, available at www.reason.com/archives/1999/08/01/warning-bioethics-may-be-hazar/print.  Bioethics and the wisdom of giving patients distressing genetic information are still controversial today.  But the question of whether the concerns were well-founded is beside the point.  It is difficult to imagine any company without a strong, exclusive patent position enduring years of losses to overcome this kind of opposition and deliver life-saving testing to patients.
Patent Exclusivity Increases Access to HBOC Compared to Lynch Testing
Delivering quality testing to as many appropriate patients as possible should be the ultimate goal of the patents and, thus, the ultimate measure of whether the BRCA patents are beneficial.  Not how many providers offer the test.  Not whether researchers subjectively feel unfettered to tinker with the genes.  Not whether integrated or public health systems can maximize workflow efficiency by performing the test in public hospitals.  Comparing testing levels of HBOC syndrome versus Lynch syndrome in the United States shows that the BRCA patents have led to wider patient access to higher quality testing.
Background.  HBOC syndrome is a disorder caused by a mutation in, e.g., BRCA1 or BRCA2.  Lynch syndrome is a disorder caused by a mutation in a mismatch repair genes, which predisposes a person to colorectal, endometrial, and other cancers.  HBOC and Lynch share numerous similarities that make for an excellent comparison between exclusivity and non-exclusivity in genetic testing.  For example:
•	Similar prevalence in overall population …
–	HBOC ~ 1/400
–	Lynch ~ 1/440
•	Similar prevalence in cancer population …
–	HBOC ~ 7% of breast cancer
–	Lynch ~ 3-5% of colorectal cancer
•	Similar prevalence/mortality for breast cancer and colorectal cancer
–	Breast cancer ? 2nd most commonly diagnosed cancer &#038; 3rd highest in estimated yearly deaths
–	Colorectal cancer ? 4th most commonly diagnosed cancer &#038; 2nd highest in estimated yearly deaths
•	Similarly drastic increases in cancer risk with each syndrome
–	HBOC
  
–	Lynch
 

The patent landscapes for HBOC and Lynch are quite different, however.  The patents first disclosing the BRCA genes are exclusively licensed to Myriad, while the patents for the Lynch genes are non-exclusively licensed.  As such, NCBI’s Genetic Testing Registry lists only one provider of full-sequence BRCA analysis (Myriad) and 15 providers of Lynch testing.  
Myriad itself offers Lynch syndrome testing.  Using internal Myriad data based on market analysis and competitive intelligence, the following statistics show that this difference in patent landscape has driven a marked difference in test quality and utilization. 
Pricing.  One of the most common allegations by gene patent opponents is that gene patents lead to higher prices.  This is clearly untrue as to HBOC v. Lynch.  As noted by the Duke IGSP: “Prices for BRCA1 and 2 testing do not reflect an obvious price premium attributable to exclusive patent rights compared with [Lynch] testing, and indeed, Myriad’s per unit costs are somewhat lower for BRCA1/2 testing than testing for [Lynch].”  Cook-Deegan at S15 (Abstract).
Quality.  Some allege that patents lead to patent holder complacency and lower test quality.  This is also untrue.  One of the best examples is the issue of variants of uncertain significance (“VUS”).  A VUS is a change in a patient’s gene where it is currently unclear whether the change leads to increased risk of disease.  Myriad has invested $100Ms in reclassifying VUS.  As a result, Myriad’s VUS rate is less than 3% for HBOC while the rate of VUS for non-Myriad Lynch providers ranges from 15% to 30% depending on the gene.  Similarly, Myriad’s average turn-around time for BRCA testing is less than two weeks, while the average for non-Myriad Lynch providers is around double that.
Access.  Finally, far more patients get tested for HBOC than for Lynch.  From June 2010 to the present, Myriad tested nearly 340,000 patients for HBOC.  Over the same period, just over 70,000 patients received Lynch testing.  Thus, a single, incentivized provider performed almost 5X as many HBOC tests (of higher quality at a similar price) as 15 different Lynch providers.  Again quoting Linda Bruzzone on the problem of a lack of “ownership” in genetic testing:
It is our belief, had there been a single patent for Lynch syndrome, public awareness would be far more enhanced.  More physicians would have knowledge of the condition in order to diagnose affected persons.  Tests would be improved and confusion over the testing process would alleviate with one central repository.  Many more lives would have been saved.  Many of our families wish there would have been one central company, with a patent and believe it could have saved the lives of our families.
L. Bruzzone, Written Comments on Genetic Diagnostic Testing Study, USPTO Public Roundtable on Genetic Diagnostic Testing (January 10, 2013), available at http://www.uspto.gov/aia_implementation/gen_e_lsi_20130207.pdf. 
It Is the Same Story When BRCA Testing Is Compared Between US and Europe
Perhaps an even better comparison than HBOC versus Lynch is a comparison within HBOC: USA versus Europe.  While nominal differences between HBOC and Lynch are very unlikely to account for the marked difference in quality and utilization, comparing US BRCA and European BRCA excludes even these differences as possible causes.
For this analysis, data was compiled from data that Myriad separately commissioned from a third-party consultant to analyze the HBOC testing market in five key European countries: Germany (DE), France (FR), Switzerland (CH), Italy (IT), and Spain (ESP).  Considering these countries as a group, which I will call simply “Europe” for the purposes of this article, they are roughly comparable to the US in both population and per capita GDP (Europe is roughly 75% of US in both measures).
The patent landscapes for BRCA in the US and Europe are quite different.  While Myriad has exclusive license to BRCA patents in Europe, the attitude in Europe toward the patents is very different from the US.  N. Hawkins, The Impact of Human Gene Patents on Genetic Testing in the UK, 13 GENET. MED. 320 (2011) (“[G]ene patents are essentially ignored.”).  As such, NCBI’s Genetic Testing Registry lists only one provider of full-sequence BRCA analysis in the US (Myriad) and 25 providers in Europe.  This difference in provider exclusivity has driven a striking difference in test quality and utilization despite similar or better prices at Myriad. 
•	Pricing
  
–	BRCA testing in CH reimbursed at 5,500€ until Myriad entered Europe (dropped in response to Myriad’s lower test price)

•	VUS Rates
 
–	The five European countries have VUS rates ranging between >7X and >11X that of Myriad.

•	Average Turn-Around Time (in weeks)
 

In Switzerland, for example, the average patient would wait five months and have more than a 30% chance of getting an inconclusive result.  That same patient tested by Myriad would get a result within two weeks and have less than a 3% chance of an inconclusive result, all for a price that is 25% lower.
Access.  What about actual patient testing, our “ultimate measure” of the value of the patents?  Far more patients get tested for HBOC in the US than in Europe.  Adjusting for population differences, none of the countries in this sample reaches even 40% of the proportional utilization of HBOC testing in the US:
  
In other words, a single, incentivized provider performs between 2.5X and 6.5X as many HBOC tests (of higher quality with faster turn-around time) as 25+ different HBOC testing providers.  
What Can We Learn From This?
Many gene patent opponents attack the patents on innovation grounds (“They stifle innovation”).  All available evidence shows this to be false.  Some attempt to link gene patents to harms in patient welfare (“The patents lead to more expensive, lower quality tests”).  Myriad’s experience shows there to be no link.
An endpoint analysis of how many patients get what quality of testing at what price under the exclusive provider and non-exclusive provider models shows that the incentives found only in an exclusive provider model result in better, faster, reasonably-priced tests delivered to vastly more patients.  The data presented here suggest a significant positive effect of gene patents on patient access and explain the yearning amongst many patients for an incentivized standard-bearer in genetic testing.  When  coupled with the complete lack of data suggesting any negative effect, these data strongly warn against the drastic “solutions” to a non-existent problem offered by gene patent opponents (e.g., invalidating in the Myriad case 30+ years of patents on which the biotech industry is built).<div class='yarpp-related-rss'>

Related posts:<ol>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/01/16/getting-beyond-witch-trials/id=33294/' rel='bookmark' title='Gene Patents: Getting Beyond Witch Trials'>Gene Patents: Getting Beyond Witch Trials</a><small>The USPTO Roundtable on genetic testing exposed claims that have driven the debate so far to a rare scrutiny.  Perhaps the bonfires being prepared for the accused are premature. One critic condemned universities issuing exclusive licenses as culprits responsible for preventing physician-run laboratories “that are begging to do the test” from offering competing testing services. The underlying notion appears that exclusive licensees who spend millions on test development and clinical validation actually provide shoddy lab work in practice, and that physician-run laboratories could do a better job. If so, no supporting evidence was given....</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2008/12/09/end-to-patents-on-single-genes-urged/id=825/' rel='bookmark' title='End to Patents on Single Genes Urged'>End to Patents on Single Genes Urged</a><small>In a statement delivered last week before the Secretary of Health and Human Services&#8217; Advisory Committee of Genetics, Health and Society (SACGHS), the Association of Molecular Pathology (AMP) urged an end to the practice of granting patents on single genes, sequences of the genome or correlations between genetic variations and biological states. It is AMP&#8217;s position [...]...</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2009/10/08/hhs-assault-on-gene-patents-and-diagnostic-methods/id=6490/' rel='bookmark' title='HHS Assault on Gene Patents and Diagnostic Methods'>HHS Assault on Gene Patents and Diagnostic Methods</a><small>UPDATED: 7:19pm on 10/8/2009 Today the Task Force on IP and Genetic Testing submitted its Final Draft Report (titled Final Draft Report on Gene Patents and Licensing Practices and Their Impact on Patient Access to Genetic Tests) to the Secretary&#8217;s Advisory Committee on Genetics, Health, and Society (SACGHS). SACGHS, in turn, voted to accept the [...]...</small></li>
</ol>

Related posts brought to you by <a href='http://yarpp.org'>Yet Another Related Posts Plugin</a>.
</div>
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/05/09/a-patient-centric-look-at-gene-patents-2/id=40119/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>6</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Design Patents in China: Applications, Infringement and Enforcement</title>
		<link>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/05/07/design-patents-in-china-applications-infringement-and-enforcement/id=40026/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/05/07/design-patents-in-china-applications-infringement-and-enforcement/id=40026/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 May 2013 12:00:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Chris Neumeyer</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[China]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Guest Contributors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IP News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IPWatchdog.com Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Fools™]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USPTO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Chinese Patents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[design patent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[design patents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Guest Contributor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[infringement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent application]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent infringement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Issued]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patents]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ipwatchdog.com/?p=40026</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Nothing has fundamentally changed about the nature of design patents.  The first US design patent was granted in 1842.  The Statue of Liberty, Coke bottle, Volkswagen Beatle, Stealth Bomber and Star Wars’ Yoda are all protected by design patents.  Design patents have long played an important role in consumer electronics, automotive, apparel, jewelry, packaging and other industries. But industrial design is becoming increasingly important, Mr. Kappos explains, because the increasing functionality of man-made devices brings with it increasing complexity, so innovative companies are constantly seeking superior designs, a convergence of form and function that helps make the complex simple and sets their companies apart; and protecting such designs is critical.<div class='yarpp-related-rss'>

Related posts:<ol>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/03/02/world-intellectual-property-indicators-2012-design-patent-highlights/id=36290/' rel='bookmark' title='World Intellectual Property Indicators 2012: Design Patent Highlights'>World Intellectual Property Indicators 2012: Design Patent Highlights</a><small>The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) publishes a yearly report of the worldwide intellectual property filings. World Intellectual Property Indicators 2012 estimates draw from approximately 133 Patent offices, and include direct national and regional applications and those received through the Hague system of international registration. ...</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2008/09/23/federal-circuit-decides-egyptian-goddess/id=204/' rel='bookmark' title='Federal Circuit Decides Egyptian Goddess'>Federal Circuit Decides Egyptian Goddess</a><small>On Monday, September 22, 2008, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decided the much anticipated design patent case &#8211; Egyptian Goddess v. Torkiya.   This decision is quite important because it changes the law applicable to design patent infringement litigation, and because all of the judges of the Court heard the [...]...</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/04/04/chinas-great-leap-forward-in-patents/id=38625/' rel='bookmark' title='China’s Great Leap Forward in Patents'>China’s Great Leap Forward in Patents</a><small>On March 28, Apple Inc. appeared in court in Shanghai to defend charges that Siri, its voice-recognition, personal-assistant software, allegedly infringes a Chinese patent. The plaintiff and owner of the patent, Zhizhen Internet Technology Co., claims its version of the software has over 100 million users in China and is requesting the court to ban all manufacturing or sales of Apple’s product in China. This was not the first time Apple faced patent infringement claims in China. Last summer a Taiwanese man sued the company in China for alleged infringement relating to its Facetime technology....</small></li>
</ol>

Related posts brought to you by <a href='http://yarpp.org'>Yet Another Related Posts Plugin</a>.
</div>
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/05/07/design-patents-in-china-applications-infringement-and-enforcement/id=40026/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Apple Seeks Patents for E-Learning App Optimized for iPad</title>
		<link>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/05/03/apple-seeks-patents-for-e-learning-app-optimized-for-ipad/id=39862/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/05/03/apple-seeks-patents-for-e-learning-app-optimized-for-ipad/id=39862/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 May 2013 12:00:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Steve Brachmann</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Apple]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Companies We Follow]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Guest Contributors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IP News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IPWatchdog.com Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Fools™]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Steve Brachmann]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology & Innovation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[apple patents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Guest Contributor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[innovation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent applications]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Issued]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Steven Brachmann]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USPTO]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ipwatchdog.com/?p=39862</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This month, the USPTO has published many Apple patent applications that are specifically for improvements to the technology developer’s mobile devices. These include a more secure system of connecting an iPhone to a computer and two new applications, one for easily creating social groups among acquaintances and another for students who wish to enroll in online courses. Apple also wants to protect a system of pre-processing images to create and store thumbnails that are accessed by image applications.<div class='yarpp-related-rss'>

Related posts:<ol>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/04/02/apple-patent-replace-back-with-page-snapback/id=38453/' rel='bookmark' title='Apple Patent to Replace the &#8220;Back&#8221; Button with &#8220;Page Snapback&#8221;'>Apple Patent to Replace the &#8220;Back&#8221; Button with &#8220;Page Snapback&#8221;</a><small>This past week was another very prolific one for Apple, as the California-based electronic device developer received 35 patents and had another 36 applications published by the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office. Many patent applications were concerned with the ways computer users interact with their systems, and we see a number of upgrades to graphical user interfaces coming for device address books and online stores. Of the patents issued to Apple, one protects a webpage retrieval method that can help browsers save a lot of time while searching for information on the Internet....</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/03/02/apple-awarded-a-patent-to-removing-blemishes-while-maintaining-image-quality/id=36217/' rel='bookmark' title='Apple Awarded a Patent to Removing Blemishes While Maintaining Image Quality'>Apple Awarded a Patent to Removing Blemishes While Maintaining Image Quality</a><small>This week Apple had a total of 34 patents issued, including four design patents and a number of patents focusing on improvements to user interfaces on various Apple devices, such as a design patent on an icon (see bottom). Other patents obtained by Apple protect a new method of removing blemishes while still maintaining image quality and an illuminable laptop latch....</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/02/16/apple-patent-application-improves-mandarin-chinese-translation/id=35556/' rel='bookmark' title='Apple Patent Application Improves Mandarin Chinese Translation'>Apple Patent Application Improves Mandarin Chinese Translation</a><small>The U.S. Patent & Trademark Office only released 16 published patent applications from Apple this week, which is a fair amount less than usual. Many of the applications listed here focus on improvements to media processing and storage, an area of computer systems which has long been a focus for Apple. Other patent applications include improvements to Mandarin Chinese language translations and methods of grading display screens for light leakage....</small></li>
</ol>

Related posts brought to you by <a href='http://yarpp.org'>Yet Another Related Posts Plugin</a>.
</div>
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/05/03/apple-seeks-patents-for-e-learning-app-optimized-for-ipad/id=39862/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Patent Attorney Asks Examiner &#8220;Are you drunk?&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/05/01/patent-attorney-asks-examiner-are-you-drunk/id=39894/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/05/01/patent-attorney-asks-examiner-are-you-drunk/id=39894/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 May 2013 17:37:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Gene Quinn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Gene Quinn]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IP News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IPWatchdog.com Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Fools™]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Prosecution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USPTO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art Unit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art Unit 3752]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Advisor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent examiner]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent examiners]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent prosecution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PatentCore]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[prosecution]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ipwatchdog.com/?p=39894</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Are you drunk? No, seriously... are you drinking scotch and whiskey with a side of crack cocaine while you "examine" patent applications? (Heavy emphasis on the quotes.) Do you just mail merge rejection letters from your home? Is that what taxpayers are getting in exchange for your services? Have you even read the patent application? I'm curious. Because you either haven't read the patent application or are... (I don't want to say the "R" word) "Special."<div class='yarpp-related-rss'>

Related posts:<ol>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/01/02/patentcore-joins-forces-with-lexisnexis-on-patent-advisor/id=32644/' rel='bookmark' title='PatentCore Joins Forces with LexisNexis® on Patent Advisor™'>PatentCore Joins Forces with LexisNexis® on Patent Advisor™</a><small>Reed Technology and Information Services Inc., a part of the LexisNexis® family and a provider of content management services, announced earlier today that it has joined forces with PatentCore. You may recall that PatentCore is a publisher of online Patent Office analytics, which for the first time has given the patent bar and public a snapshot look at what goes on inside the Patent Office Art Unit by Art Unit and patent examiner by patent examiner....</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/02/14/the-rce-backlog-a-critical-patent-office-problem/id=35431/' rel='bookmark' title='The RCE Backlog: A Critical Patent Office Problem'>The RCE Backlog: A Critical Patent Office Problem</a><small>The backlog of unexamined patent applications was down over 15.1% in September 2012, compared with October 2010. At the same time, however, the number of unexamined RCE filings grew 95.56%, after peaking at 103.93% in August 2012. In the column above labeled “Totals,” I added the number of unexamined patent application with the number of unexamined RCE filings. When you consider all of these unexamined filings the progress of the USPTO is more modest. There is not a 15.1% dip, but rather a 8.05% dip in unexamined patent filings over this interval. It seems rather clear that the USPTO has...</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2012/01/22/business-methods-by-the-numbers-a-look-inside-pto-class-705/id=21892/' rel='bookmark' title='Business Methods by the Numbers: A Look Inside PTO Class 705'>Business Methods by the Numbers: A Look Inside PTO Class 705</a><small>What these numbers tell you is if your application is in Art Unit 3622 or 3689 you are in for a long wait to obtain a patent. The numbers also show that if you carry the case all the way through appeal there is quite a high success rate for applicants; 66.7% when in Art Unit 3622 and 71.4% when in Art Unit 3689. It is hard to know for sure what is going on in Art Units 3622 and 3689, but one number jumps out at me as particularly alarming. In Art Unit 3689 nearly 4 out of 5...</small></li>
</ol>

Related posts brought to you by <a href='http://yarpp.org'>Yet Another Related Posts Plugin</a>.
</div>
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/05/01/patent-attorney-asks-examiner-are-you-drunk/id=39894/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>57</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Qualcomm Patents: Diverse Computer, Mobile Device Innovation</title>
		<link>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/04/29/qualcomm-patents-diverse-computer-mobile-device-innovation/id=39690/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/04/29/qualcomm-patents-diverse-computer-mobile-device-innovation/id=39690/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Apr 2013 14:00:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Steve Brachmann</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Companies We Follow]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Guest Contributors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IP News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IPWatchdog.com Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Fools™]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Qualcomm]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Steve Brachmann]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology & Innovation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USPTO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Guest Contributor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[networking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent application]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Issued]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[qualcomm]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Steven Brachmann]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[VOIP]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ipwatchdog.com/?p=39690</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Today, we’ll take a close look at some of the more intriguing, recent Qualcomm patent applications recently published by the USPTO, many of which show the technology developer focusing on improving mobile network connections. Patent applications released within the last month describe systems of improving mobile device Internet connectivity to peripheral devices, like printers, or while indoors for pedestrian traffic analysis. More efficient means of social network messaging is the subject of another application. A fourth application included here is filed to protect a gesture-based system of interacting with computer projectors. One patent received recently by Qualcomm, and covered below, protects a system of geographically locating computers and other devices connected to the Internet through an IP address, which doesn’t typically contain any geographical data.<div class='yarpp-related-rss'>

Related posts:<ol>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/04/14/rim-seeks-patent-to-address-cyber-bullying-on-social-networks/id=39067/' rel='bookmark' title='RIM Seeks Patent to Address Cyber-Bullying on Social Networks'>RIM Seeks Patent to Address Cyber-Bullying on Social Networks</a><small>Of note, recently the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office published multiple patent applications filed by Research In Motion that pertain to smarter, more efficient forms of electronic communication for both cell phones and computers. Another patent application offers some promise for slowing the progress of cyber-bullying on social networks. Yet another patent application takes uses a touchscreen to store fingerprint information to determine ownership for images captured by the device. Still another application of potential interest is one that seeks protection for a system making it easier for mobile content providers to sell digital content, particularly periodicals....</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/04/16/samsung-awarded-system-of-location-tracking-designed-for-parents/id=39109/' rel='bookmark' title='Samsung Awarded System of Location Tracking Designed for Parents'>Samsung Awarded System of Location Tracking Designed for Parents</a><small>Patent applications published recently by the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office show Samsung’s goals of developing stronger systems of software protection and user interfaces for gesture-based gaming systems. Another patent application assigned to Samsung Electronics could protect an important advance in cancer treatments. One of the recent patents awarded to Samsung from the USPTO protects a more efficient system of location tracking designed for parents....</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/03/11/apple-patent-apps-digital-rights-management/id=37058/' rel='bookmark' title='Apple Patent Apps Include 3 For Digital Rights Management'>Apple Patent Apps Include 3 For Digital Rights Management</a><small>The system laid out in these three interrelated patent applications would create an entire secondhand market for digital content like eBooks, music files and other software by managing access rights for a single file across multiple users. For example, a user could choose to sell the digital access rights to a music file to another user. When the transaction takes place, the server hosting the file receives a notice that access has shifted from one user to another. The patent’s methods also mention facilitating a money transaction with the access transfer. This system would also help users who want to...</small></li>
</ol>

Related posts brought to you by <a href='http://yarpp.org'>Yet Another Related Posts Plugin</a>.
</div>
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/04/29/qualcomm-patents-diverse-computer-mobile-device-innovation/id=39690/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>USPTO e-Office Action Notification Failure for April 24-25</title>
		<link>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/04/25/uspto-e-office-action-notification-failure-for-april-24-25/id=39664/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/04/25/uspto-e-office-action-notification-failure-for-april-24-25/id=39664/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Apr 2013 15:08:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>U.S.P.T.O.</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[IP News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IPWatchdog.com Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Fools™]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USPTO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[e-Office Action]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patents]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ipwatchdog.com/?p=39664</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Due to a system issue, the e-Office Action process is currently experiencing a problem with sending emails to external email addresses. Automatic Email notifications have been delayed for e-Office Action participants on 4/24 and 4/25 – emails are currently being sent manually. We are working to resolve this problem and anticipate the e-Office Action program will be working again shortly. In the meantime, please go to the Outgoing Correspondence tab in Private PAIR to check if you have new correspondence from the Office.<div class='yarpp-related-rss'>

Related posts:<ol>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/01/02/patentcore-joins-forces-with-lexisnexis-on-patent-advisor/id=32644/' rel='bookmark' title='PatentCore Joins Forces with LexisNexis® on Patent Advisor™'>PatentCore Joins Forces with LexisNexis® on Patent Advisor™</a><small>Reed Technology and Information Services Inc., a part of the LexisNexis® family and a provider of content management services, announced earlier today that it has joined forces with PatentCore. You may recall that PatentCore is a publisher of online Patent Office analytics, which for the first time has given the patent bar and public a snapshot look at what goes on inside the Patent Office Art Unit by Art Unit and patent examiner by patent examiner....</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/03/06/bringing-digital-government-to-the-patent-office/id=36753/' rel='bookmark' title='Bringing Digital Government to the Patent Office'>Bringing Digital Government to the Patent Office</a><small>In order to file an application or view outgoing correspondence online, the practitioner must authenticate using a private certificate and password. The process relies on an antiquated browser plugin, Java, that has not been welcomed into the new operating systems that power modern smartphones and tablets. As a result, mobile prosecution is possible only through a traditional operating system running on a laptop or netbook. To rectify the situation, the PTO will need to break its dependence on browser plugins and on the proprietary authentication system it has licensed from Entrust. Rather than license another proprietary system, the agency should...</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2011/03/18/uspto-announces-accommodations-relating-to-japan-catastrophe/id=15816/' rel='bookmark' title='PTO Makes Accommodations Relating to Japan Catastrophe'>PTO Makes Accommodations Relating to Japan Catastrophe</a><small>The USPTO is offering assistance in the form of flexibility on deadlines to the full extent allowable under our laws to Japanese applicants. However, because this catastrophic event occurred outside the United States and did not result in a postal service interruption of the United States Postal Service, the USPTO has no authority to designate a postal service emergency as authorized by 35 U.S.C. 21(a). The fact that the USPTO cannot declare a postal emergency limits what allowances can be made because in the event of a postal emergency the USPTO can treat as filed any paper that would have...</small></li>
</ol>

Related posts brought to you by <a href='http://yarpp.org'>Yet Another Related Posts Plugin</a>.
</div>
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/04/25/uspto-e-office-action-notification-failure-for-april-24-25/id=39664/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Examing Hybrid Electric Vehicle Patents of Ford, Chrysler &amp; GM</title>
		<link>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/04/25/examing-hybrid-electric-vehicle-patents-of-ford-chrysler-gm/id=39501/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/04/25/examing-hybrid-electric-vehicle-patents-of-ford-chrysler-gm/id=39501/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Apr 2013 14:00:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Steve Brachmann</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Green Technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Guest Contributors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IP News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IPWatchdog.com Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Fools™]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Steve Brachmann]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology & Innovation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USPTO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[automakers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[automotive technologies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Earth Day]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Earth Day 2013]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[green patents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Guest Contributor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mother Earth Day]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent application]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Issued]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patents]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ipwatchdog.com/?p=39501</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hybrid electric vehicles pose a number of potential environmental and economic benefits that make it an important sector within green technology. Hybrids store an electrical charge in a battery that either reduces the amount of power required from an internal combustion engine or, in the case of all-electric vehicles, powers the entire car. This technology is in many ways still in its early developmental stages, but already some car manufacturers are selling hybrid models that reach 100 miles per gallon of gasoline, according to the U.S. Department of Energy. This reduces the amount of gasoline needed from imports and reduces fossil fuel emissions to almost nil.<div class='yarpp-related-rss'>

Related posts:<ol>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/04/22/sun-power-keeping-it-green-with-new-energy-technologies/id=39354/' rel='bookmark' title='Sun Power: Keeping it Green with New Energy Technologies'>Sun Power: Keeping it Green with New Energy Technologies</a><small>Solar energy is one of the alternative energy forms that many believe can be an effective part of the new alternative energy that replaces our current carbon-based fossil fuel situation. However, solar radiation can be inconsistent based on time of day or weather, and large surface areas must be used to collect enough solar energy to generate a meaningful amount of electricity. In most of these applications, we can see solar cell panel technology being applied to individual devices and machines, collecting enough energy to charge a battery or at least reduce energy used from other sources. These patent applications...</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/04/23/innovations-for-a-greener-future-recycling-2013/id=39221/' rel='bookmark' title='Innovations for a Greener Future: Recycling 2013'>Innovations for a Greener Future: Recycling 2013</a><small>Many recent patents and patent applications have been released within the month by the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office that either improve on recycling methods or make better use of recycled material. A fully-recyclable cardboard bicycle that can bear heavy loads is the subject of one application. Halliburton Energy Services has also filed two applications for recycling asphalt and ceramic materials while drilling wells. Another application from fabric developer Tintoria Piana looks to reclaim cotton from old mattresses. Even diesel soot may see more reuse through recycling, thanks to an application assigned to Dearborn Financial. We’ve also found one very...</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/02/04/the-uspto-green-tech-program-guidepost-for-the-future/id=34450/' rel='bookmark' title='The USPTO Green Tech Program: Guidepost for the Future'>The USPTO Green Tech Program: Guidepost for the Future</a><small>The Green Technology program has taken on a new importance. Clean tech represents a major element in the economics and pubic debate over federal funding of research and development. The recent spate of high profile company failures — companies that received billions of dollars in loan guarantees and financial incentives and tax credits at state and federal levels — have caused a deceleration in funding of green technology ventures and a new dialog on whether these innovations are market ready and strong enough to succeed in the marketplace without such support...</small></li>
</ol>

Related posts brought to you by <a href='http://yarpp.org'>Yet Another Related Posts Plugin</a>.
</div>
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/04/25/examing-hybrid-electric-vehicle-patents-of-ford-chrysler-gm/id=39501/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Innovations for a Greener Future: Recycling 2013</title>
		<link>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/04/23/innovations-for-a-greener-future-recycling-2013/id=39221/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/04/23/innovations-for-a-greener-future-recycling-2013/id=39221/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Apr 2013 13:00:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Steve Brachmann</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Green Technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Guest Contributors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IP News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IPWatchdog.com Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Fools™]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Steve Brachmann]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology & Innovation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USPTO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[clean technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Earth Day]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Earth Day 2013]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Green]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[green patents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Guest Contributor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent application]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Issued]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[recycling patents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Steven Brachmann]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ipwatchdog.com/?p=39221</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Many recent patents and patent applications have been released within the month by the U.S. Patent &#038; Trademark Office that either improve on recycling methods or make better use of recycled material. A fully-recyclable cardboard bicycle that can bear heavy loads is the subject of one application. Halliburton Energy Services has also filed two applications for recycling asphalt and ceramic materials while drilling wells. Another application from fabric developer Tintoria Piana looks to reclaim cotton from old mattresses. Even diesel soot may see more reuse through recycling, thanks to an application assigned to Dearborn Financial. We’ve also found one very interesting patent awarded to a solo inventor from Missouri that can allow for the reuse of rubber from tires through heated vapor distillation.<div class='yarpp-related-rss'>

Related posts:<ol>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/04/22/sun-power-keeping-it-green-with-new-energy-technologies/id=39354/' rel='bookmark' title='Sun Power: Keeping it Green with New Energy Technologies'>Sun Power: Keeping it Green with New Energy Technologies</a><small>Solar energy is one of the alternative energy forms that many believe can be an effective part of the new alternative energy that replaces our current carbon-based fossil fuel situation. However, solar radiation can be inconsistent based on time of day or weather, and large surface areas must be used to collect enough solar energy to generate a meaningful amount of electricity. In most of these applications, we can see solar cell panel technology being applied to individual devices and machines, collecting enough energy to charge a battery or at least reduce energy used from other sources. These patent applications...</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/04/25/examing-hybrid-electric-vehicle-patents-of-ford-chrysler-gm/id=39501/' rel='bookmark' title='Examing Hybrid Electric Vehicle Patents of Ford, Chrysler &amp; GM'>Examing Hybrid Electric Vehicle Patents of Ford, Chrysler &#038; GM</a><small>Hybrid electric vehicles pose a number of potential environmental and economic benefits that make it an important sector within green technology. Hybrids store an electrical charge in a battery that either reduces the amount of power required from an internal combustion engine or, in the case of all-electric vehicles, powers the entire car. This technology is in many ways still in its early developmental stages, but already some car manufacturers are selling hybrid models that reach 100 miles per gallon of gasoline, according to the U.S. Department of Energy. This reduces the amount of gasoline needed from imports and reduces...</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/04/25/the-energy-and-environmental-innovation-conundrum-can-the-patent-system-protect-new-ways-of-using-old-technologies/id=39504/' rel='bookmark' title='The Energy and Environmental Innovation Conundrum: Can the Patent System Protect New Ways of Using Old Technologies?'>The Energy and Environmental Innovation Conundrum: Can the Patent System Protect New Ways of Using Old Technologies?</a><small>The field of clean or green technology is one of those areas where innovation is desperately needed if our planet Earth is to survive as a place where all living things can thrive. But what if a “new” and needed technology is not really new, but rather a new way of doing something which builds on a known (and patented technology where the exclusive protection period has expired)? And, what if the “new” technology cannot find its way to market (i.e. real-world application) unless there is funding? And, what if that funding requires some type of market exclusivity (such as...</small></li>
</ol>

Related posts brought to you by <a href='http://yarpp.org'>Yet Another Related Posts Plugin</a>.
</div>
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/04/23/innovations-for-a-greener-future-recycling-2013/id=39221/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Sun Power: Keeping it Green with New Energy Technologies</title>
		<link>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/04/22/sun-power-keeping-it-green-with-new-energy-technologies/id=39354/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/04/22/sun-power-keeping-it-green-with-new-energy-technologies/id=39354/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Apr 2013 13:00:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Steve Brachmann</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Green Technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Guest Contributors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IP News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IPWatchdog.com Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Fools™]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Steve Brachmann]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology & Innovation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[clean energy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[clean technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Earth Day]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Earth Day 2013]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Green]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[green patents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Guest Contributor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent application]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Issued]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[solar energy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[solar energy collection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[solar power]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Steven Brachmann]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USPTO]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ipwatchdog.com/?p=39354</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Solar energy is one of the alternative energy forms that many believe can be an effective part of the new alternative energy that replaces our current carbon-based fossil fuel situation. However, solar radiation can be inconsistent based on time of day or weather, and large surface areas must be used to collect enough solar energy to generate a meaningful amount of electricity. In most of these applications, we can see solar cell panel technology being applied to individual devices and machines, collecting enough energy to charge a battery or at least reduce energy used from other sources. These patent applications describe cars, digital cameras, irrigation systems and even digital cameras with solar energy collection technology.<div class='yarpp-related-rss'>

Related posts:<ol>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/04/23/innovations-for-a-greener-future-recycling-2013/id=39221/' rel='bookmark' title='Innovations for a Greener Future: Recycling 2013'>Innovations for a Greener Future: Recycling 2013</a><small>Many recent patents and patent applications have been released within the month by the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office that either improve on recycling methods or make better use of recycled material. A fully-recyclable cardboard bicycle that can bear heavy loads is the subject of one application. Halliburton Energy Services has also filed two applications for recycling asphalt and ceramic materials while drilling wells. Another application from fabric developer Tintoria Piana looks to reclaim cotton from old mattresses. Even diesel soot may see more reuse through recycling, thanks to an application assigned to Dearborn Financial. We’ve also found one very...</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/04/25/examing-hybrid-electric-vehicle-patents-of-ford-chrysler-gm/id=39501/' rel='bookmark' title='Examing Hybrid Electric Vehicle Patents of Ford, Chrysler &amp; GM'>Examing Hybrid Electric Vehicle Patents of Ford, Chrysler &#038; GM</a><small>Hybrid electric vehicles pose a number of potential environmental and economic benefits that make it an important sector within green technology. Hybrids store an electrical charge in a battery that either reduces the amount of power required from an internal combustion engine or, in the case of all-electric vehicles, powers the entire car. This technology is in many ways still in its early developmental stages, but already some car manufacturers are selling hybrid models that reach 100 miles per gallon of gasoline, according to the U.S. Department of Energy. This reduces the amount of gasoline needed from imports and reduces...</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/04/08/boeing-patent-application-flight-trajectory-prediction/id=38785/' rel='bookmark' title='Boeing Patent Application Flight Trajectory Prediction'>Boeing Patent Application Flight Trajectory Prediction</a><small>Recent patent applications assigned to Boeing show the company’s desire to create more adaptive in-flight management in response to unforeseen conditions. Another patent application describes a new system of solar energy collection that can generate energy from a very wide spectrum of light waves. One patent issued to Boeing also provides an interesting new development in the arena of laser light communication for data transmission. ...</small></li>
</ol>

Related posts brought to you by <a href='http://yarpp.org'>Yet Another Related Posts Plugin</a>.
</div>
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/04/22/sun-power-keeping-it-green-with-new-energy-technologies/id=39354/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Samsung Awarded System of Location Tracking Designed for Parents</title>
		<link>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/04/16/samsung-awarded-system-of-location-tracking-designed-for-parents/id=39109/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/04/16/samsung-awarded-system-of-location-tracking-designed-for-parents/id=39109/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Apr 2013 17:53:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Steve Brachmann</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Companies We Follow]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Guest Contributors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IP News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IPWatchdog.com Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Fools™]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Samsung]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Steve Brachmann]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology & Innovation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USPTO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Guest Contributor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[innovation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent application]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Issued]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[samsung]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[technology]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ipwatchdog.com/?p=39109</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Patent applications published recently by the U.S. Patent &#038; Trademark Office show Samsung’s goals of developing stronger systems of software protection and user interfaces for gesture-based gaming systems. Another patent application assigned to Samsung Electronics could protect an important advance in cancer treatments. One of the recent patents awarded to Samsung from the USPTO protects a more efficient system of location tracking designed for parents.<div class='yarpp-related-rss'>

Related posts:<ol>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/03/11/apple-patent-apps-digital-rights-management/id=37058/' rel='bookmark' title='Apple Patent Apps Include 3 For Digital Rights Management'>Apple Patent Apps Include 3 For Digital Rights Management</a><small>The system laid out in these three interrelated patent applications would create an entire secondhand market for digital content like eBooks, music files and other software by managing access rights for a single file across multiple users. For example, a user could choose to sell the digital access rights to a music file to another user. When the transaction takes place, the server hosting the file receives a notice that access has shifted from one user to another. The patent’s methods also mention facilitating a money transaction with the access transfer. This system would also help users who want to...</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/04/14/rim-seeks-patent-to-address-cyber-bullying-on-social-networks/id=39067/' rel='bookmark' title='RIM Seeks Patent to Address Cyber-Bullying on Social Networks'>RIM Seeks Patent to Address Cyber-Bullying on Social Networks</a><small>Of note, recently the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office published multiple patent applications filed by Research In Motion that pertain to smarter, more efficient forms of electronic communication for both cell phones and computers. Another patent application offers some promise for slowing the progress of cyber-bullying on social networks. Yet another patent application takes uses a touchscreen to store fingerprint information to determine ownership for images captured by the device. Still another application of potential interest is one that seeks protection for a system making it easier for mobile content providers to sell digital content, particularly periodicals....</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/01/18/apple-seeks-patent-for-parental-controls-on-pre-paid-debit-cards/id=33529/' rel='bookmark' title='Apple Seeks Patent for Parental Controls on Pre-Paid Debit Cards'>Apple Seeks Patent for Parental Controls on Pre-Paid Debit Cards</a><small>Apple Inc. is always applying for protections on different device designs and computer systems. As happens every once in a while, three of these 18 published patents are part of a single series; these patents pertain to linking user accounts for mobile app software to obtain upgrades. Other patent applications seek protections on applications that provide parental oversight of a child’s pre-paid debit account or aid zoom functions on picture viewing applications. ...</small></li>
</ol>

Related posts brought to you by <a href='http://yarpp.org'>Yet Another Related Posts Plugin</a>.
</div>
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/04/16/samsung-awarded-system-of-location-tracking-designed-for-parents/id=39109/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>RIM Seeks Patent to Address Cyber-Bullying on Social Networks</title>
		<link>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/04/14/rim-seeks-patent-to-address-cyber-bullying-on-social-networks/id=39067/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/04/14/rim-seeks-patent-to-address-cyber-bullying-on-social-networks/id=39067/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Apr 2013 12:30:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Steve Brachmann</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Companies We Follow]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Guest Contributors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IP News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IPWatchdog.com Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Fools™]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Steve Brachmann]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology & Innovation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USPTO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Guest Contributor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[innovation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent application]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Issued]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[research in motion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rim]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Steven Brachmann]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[technology]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ipwatchdog.com/?p=39067</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Of note, recently the U.S. Patent &#038; Trademark Office published multiple patent applications filed by Research In Motion that pertain to smarter, more efficient forms of electronic communication for both cell phones and computers. Another patent application offers some promise for slowing the progress of cyber-bullying on social networks. Yet another patent application takes uses a touchscreen to store fingerprint information to determine ownership for images captured by the device. Still another application of potential interest is one that seeks protection for a system making it easier for mobile content providers to sell digital content, particularly periodicals.<div class='yarpp-related-rss'>

Related posts:<ol>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/04/16/samsung-awarded-system-of-location-tracking-designed-for-parents/id=39109/' rel='bookmark' title='Samsung Awarded System of Location Tracking Designed for Parents'>Samsung Awarded System of Location Tracking Designed for Parents</a><small>Patent applications published recently by the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office show Samsung’s goals of developing stronger systems of software protection and user interfaces for gesture-based gaming systems. Another patent application assigned to Samsung Electronics could protect an important advance in cancer treatments. One of the recent patents awarded to Samsung from the USPTO protects a more efficient system of location tracking designed for parents....</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/01/18/apple-seeks-patent-for-parental-controls-on-pre-paid-debit-cards/id=33529/' rel='bookmark' title='Apple Seeks Patent for Parental Controls on Pre-Paid Debit Cards'>Apple Seeks Patent for Parental Controls on Pre-Paid Debit Cards</a><small>Apple Inc. is always applying for protections on different device designs and computer systems. As happens every once in a while, three of these 18 published patents are part of a single series; these patents pertain to linking user accounts for mobile app software to obtain upgrades. Other patent applications seek protections on applications that provide parental oversight of a child’s pre-paid debit account or aid zoom functions on picture viewing applications. ...</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/02/25/apple-plans-improvement-to-video-playback-quality/id=35931/' rel='bookmark' title='Apple Plans Improvement to Video Playback Quality'>Apple Plans Improvement to Video Playback Quality</a><small>USPTO published 23 patent applications filed by California electronics development and manufacturing leader Apple Inc. Efficiency seems to be a buzz word this week, as many of the patent applications seek protections for methods of either more efficient component manufacturing or different computer-based methods of using system resources effectively, including IP address allocation. Also, one notable digital media patent application shows how Apple plans to improve video playback quality by reducing the bumps and jostles of handheld recording....</small></li>
</ol>

Related posts brought to you by <a href='http://yarpp.org'>Yet Another Related Posts Plugin</a>.
</div>
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/04/14/rim-seeks-patent-to-address-cyber-bullying-on-social-networks/id=39067/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>U.S. Department of Commerce Announces Patents for Humanity Winners</title>
		<link>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/04/12/patents-for-humanity-winners/id=39027/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/04/12/patents-for-humanity-winners/id=39027/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Apr 2013 13:30:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>U.S.P.T.O.</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Department of Commerce]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IP News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IPWatchdog.com Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Fools™]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USPTO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patents for Humanity]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ipwatchdog.com/?p=39027</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The U.S. Department of Commerce today announced the winners of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (USPTO) Patents for Humanity pilot program during an awards ceremony on Capitol Hill supported by the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation. Launched by the USPTO in February 2012 as part of an Obama administration initiative promoting game-changing innovations to solve long-standing development challenges, Patents for Humanity is a competition recognizing patent owners and licensees who address global challenges in health and standards of living.<div class='yarpp-related-rss'>

Related posts:<ol>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2012/07/24/on-patents-aiding-humanity/id=26779/' rel='bookmark' title='On Patents Aiding Humanity'>On Patents Aiding Humanity</a><small>GUEST CONTRIBUTION BY USPTO DIRECTOR DAVID KAPPOS... President Obama's Global Development Policy — the first by a U.S. Administration — recognizes that raising the living standards of humanity is not just a moral imperative for the United States; it is vital for our economic and national security. Patents for Humanity advances this policy by leveraging the power of invention to improve lives. I invite all patent holders to consider how your inventions could further the aims of the President's Global Development Policy. If you are actively addressing humanitarian needs with your patents, please apply to our Patents for Humanity prize...</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2012/02/08/patents-for-humanity-announced-at-white-house-event/id=22166/' rel='bookmark' title='Patents for Humanity Announced at White House Event'>Patents for Humanity Announced at White House Event</a><small>I had the honor of being invited to the White House today for the Innovation for Global Development Event, which was held in support of the President’s commitment to using harness the power of innovation to solve long-standing global development challenges. As a part of this event, David Kappos, Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and the Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office, launched a pilot program dubbed Patents for Humanity, which is a voluntary prize competition for patent owners and licensees. The pilot program seeks to encourage businesses of all kinds to apply their patented...</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2012/12/21/pto-announces-new-pph-with-taiwan-intellectual-property-office/id=31990/' rel='bookmark' title='PTO Announces New PPH with Taiwan Intellectual Property Office'>PTO Announces New PPH with Taiwan Intellectual Property Office</a><small>The U.S. Department of Commerce’s United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) today announced the launch of a permanent Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) program with the Taiwan Intellectual Property Office (TIPO). The permanent PPH program, which started on September 1, 2012, will continue to permit each office to benefit from work previously done by the other office, which reduces the examination workload and improves patent quality....</small></li>
</ol>

Related posts brought to you by <a href='http://yarpp.org'>Yet Another Related Posts Plugin</a>.
</div>
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/04/12/patents-for-humanity-winners/id=39027/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>USPTO Proposes New Rules to Implement Patent Law Treaty</title>
		<link>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/04/12/uspto-proposes-new-rules-to-implement-patent-law-treaty/id=39036/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/04/12/uspto-proposes-new-rules-to-implement-patent-law-treaty/id=39036/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Apr 2013 10:15:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Gene Quinn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Gene Quinn]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IP News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IPWatchdog.com Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Fools™]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USPTO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[foreign priority]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hague Agreement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nonprovisional patent application]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nonprovisional patent applications]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent filing date]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Law Treaties Implementation Act of 2012]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Law Treaty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PLT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PLTIA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[priority]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[restoration of right of priority]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rulemaking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unavoidable abandonment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unintentional abandonment]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ipwatchdog.com/?p=39036</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The notable changes in the PLTIA to implement the PLT can be generally broken down into four major categories, although there are all kinds of nuance as you probably could have guessed. Nevertheless, the categories are: (1) Changes pertaining to a patent application filing date; (2) changes pertaining to the revival of abandoned applications and acceptance of delayed maintenance fee payments; (3) changes pertaining to the restoration of the right of priority application to a foreign application or the benefit of a provisional application; and (4) changes to require that an application be in condition for examination within eight months of filing or lose patent term adjustment.<div class='yarpp-related-rss'>

Related posts:<ol>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2012/12/06/patent-law-changes-claims-unnecessary-to-obtain-a-filing-date/id=31038/' rel='bookmark' title='Patent Law Changes &#8211; Claims Unnecessary to Obtain a Filing Date'>Patent Law Changes &#8211; Claims Unnecessary to Obtain a Filing Date</a><small>On Wednesday, December 5, 2012, the House of Representatives passed two bills that are now await President Obama's signature. The bill — S. 3486— implements both the Patent Law Treaty (PLT) and the Hague Agreement Concerning the International Registration of Industrial Designs. The U.S. Senate previously passed the same bill in the same form on September 22, 2012. Thus, the remaking of U.S. patent law and patent practice continues, and we will see more rulemaking coming from the United States Patent and Trademark Office....</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2012/10/14/the-aia-is-the-first-universally-equal-patent-law-in-the-world/id=28850/' rel='bookmark' title='The AIA is the First Universally Equal Patent Law in the World'>The AIA is the First Universally Equal Patent Law in the World</a><small>The AIA is the tough patent law for the U.S. because of the following reasons: (1) U.S. applicants cannot get benefit of the standard and absolute grace periods on the earliest effective filing date in a foreign countries whereas foreign applicant can get benefit of their own standard grace period (usually six months) and complete benefit of AIA’s standard and absolute grace periods in the U.S. on the earliest effective filing date. (2) U.S. patents claiming foreign priority becomes stronger prior art under AIA §102 (d). (3) Prior art of public use and on sale is now worldwide activity....</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2012/10/18/uspto-proposes-updated-professional-conduct-rules/id=29003/' rel='bookmark' title='USPTO Proposes Updated Professional Conduct Rules'>USPTO Proposes Updated Professional Conduct Rules</a><small>This proposed rule package adopts most ABA provisions wholesale or with minor revisions and codifies many professional responsibility obligations that already apply to the practice of law. Specifically, the proposed rules will streamline practitioners’ professional responsibility obligations, bringing USPTO obligations in line with most practitioners’ state bar requirements. The package also proposes to eliminate the annual practitioner maintenance fee....</small></li>
</ol>

Related posts brought to you by <a href='http://yarpp.org'>Yet Another Related Posts Plugin</a>.
</div>
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/04/12/uspto-proposes-new-rules-to-implement-patent-law-treaty/id=39036/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
