Paul Conover, Curtis Huffmire and Brent Babcock recently presented at the IN3 Medical Device Summit conference in San Francisco, CA. This presentation covers: recent patent cases from the supreme court, medical device patent statistics and cases, and USPTO Post-Grant Proceedings lessons learned after two years.
The marcus evans 5th Product and Pipeline Enhancement for Generics Conference hosted industry leaders within the Generic Pharmaceutical, Branded Pharmaceutical and API industries operating globally. These leaders shared best practices, strategies and tools on portfolio management and business strategy, as well as legal, intellectual property and patent issues.
Knobbe Martens' attorneys presented on the following topic:
*Analyzing Recent Updates to the Hatch-Waxman Act to Grasp Future Impacts and Challenges
*Studying recent changes that could impact the industry, including 180-day exclusivity and complications regarding patent listings
*Drawing lessons from the close relationship between the patenting of generic products and FDA regulatory approval to pinpoint areas of improvement
*Considering the impact biosimilar products could have on market entry and patent strategies
*Reviewing both real-life rulings and hypotheticals regarding Hatch-Waxman litigation to identify future strategies
variety of industries and private practitioners attend this event for worthwhile benchmarking and networking with the “who’s who” of the 337 bar, including senior decision-makers from the ITC, companies and practitioners involved in some of the most high profile cases to date.
The Federal Circuit Review monthly newsletter is now available. This month’s newsletter covers the latest decisions handed down from the Federal Circuit:
Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co. v. Sandoz Inc.; In Re Youman; In re Montgomery; Leader Technologies, Inc. v. Facebook, Inc.; Apple, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.; In Re Baxter International, Inc.; Mintz v. Dietz & Watson, Inc.
Intellectual Property Rights In India: Patents Trademarks And Copyrights JRA & Associates
Intellectual property (IP) refers to creations of the mind, such as inventions; literary and artistic works; designs; and symbols, names and images used in commerce.
IP is protected in law by, for example, patents, copyright and trademarks, which enable people to earn recognition or financial benefit from what they invent or create. By striking the right balance between the interests of innovators and the wider public interest, the IP system aims to foster an environment in which creativity and innovation can flourish.
Let us try and understand the basics of these intellectual property rights, how they can be applied for in India and understand how and why they are litigated so fiercely.
Paul Conover, Curtis Huffmire and Brent Babcock recently presented at the IN3 Medical Device Summit conference in San Francisco, CA. This presentation covers: recent patent cases from the supreme court, medical device patent statistics and cases, and USPTO Post-Grant Proceedings lessons learned after two years.
The marcus evans 5th Product and Pipeline Enhancement for Generics Conference hosted industry leaders within the Generic Pharmaceutical, Branded Pharmaceutical and API industries operating globally. These leaders shared best practices, strategies and tools on portfolio management and business strategy, as well as legal, intellectual property and patent issues.
Knobbe Martens' attorneys presented on the following topic:
*Analyzing Recent Updates to the Hatch-Waxman Act to Grasp Future Impacts and Challenges
*Studying recent changes that could impact the industry, including 180-day exclusivity and complications regarding patent listings
*Drawing lessons from the close relationship between the patenting of generic products and FDA regulatory approval to pinpoint areas of improvement
*Considering the impact biosimilar products could have on market entry and patent strategies
*Reviewing both real-life rulings and hypotheticals regarding Hatch-Waxman litigation to identify future strategies
variety of industries and private practitioners attend this event for worthwhile benchmarking and networking with the “who’s who” of the 337 bar, including senior decision-makers from the ITC, companies and practitioners involved in some of the most high profile cases to date.
The Federal Circuit Review monthly newsletter is now available. This month’s newsletter covers the latest decisions handed down from the Federal Circuit:
Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co. v. Sandoz Inc.; In Re Youman; In re Montgomery; Leader Technologies, Inc. v. Facebook, Inc.; Apple, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.; In Re Baxter International, Inc.; Mintz v. Dietz & Watson, Inc.
Intellectual Property Rights In India: Patents Trademarks And Copyrights JRA & Associates
Intellectual property (IP) refers to creations of the mind, such as inventions; literary and artistic works; designs; and symbols, names and images used in commerce.
IP is protected in law by, for example, patents, copyright and trademarks, which enable people to earn recognition or financial benefit from what they invent or create. By striking the right balance between the interests of innovators and the wider public interest, the IP system aims to foster an environment in which creativity and innovation can flourish.
Let us try and understand the basics of these intellectual property rights, how they can be applied for in India and understand how and why they are litigated so fiercely.
Starting May 13, significant changes in the law of design patents come into effect. First, the U.S. and Japan both join the Hague Agreement for the Registration of Industrial Designs. Second, all U.S. design patents filed May 13 or later will have a 15-year term from issuance. This is an increase from the current 14-year term. Third, starting May 13, applicants are no longer required to file a petition and pay fees to include color drawings in U.S. design applications.
The Federal Circuit Review is a monthly newsletter featuring the latest case summaries handed down from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
In this Issue:
Smartphone War Update: Some of Apple’s Patents Survive Invalidity Challenge
• Sale by Foreign Supplier Invalidated Patent
• District Court Abused Discretion in Refusing to Keep Confidential Documents Secret
The Trademark Review is a monthly newsletter prepared by Knobbe Martens attorneys covering relevant and current issues in trademark law.
In this Issue:
• Ron Paul’s Complaint to Regain RonPaul.org Constitutes Reverse Domain Hijacking
• MOTT’s for Baby Food Is Considered Primarily Merely a Surname
• Company Uses More than Is Reasonably Necessary to Advertise that its Test Strips Work with Another’s Meters
On March 30 and 31, 2017, Knobbe Martens attorneys presented written and oral educational material at an IP Seminar Series “Overseas Intellectual Property Rights Protection for Chinese Enterprises” sponsored by CHOFN, a Chinese IP law firm in Guangzhou and Shenzhen, China.
These are the slides of a presentation to solicitors, barristers and others at 4-5 Gray;s Inn Square on 26 June 2013. It defines intellectual property ("IP") as the legal protection of intellectual assets ("IA") which are the brands, designs, technology or creative works that give a business a competitive advantage over its rivals. The study discusses how the law protects each of those assets: brands by designs, passing off, geographical indications and registered designs, for example,. and technology by patents, the law of confidence, unregistered design right, plant breeders rights and copyright. However, IP rights create monopolies and restraints of trade that are as harmful as any other. The law that creates these rights also regulates their subsistence and exercise. Thus, IP law strikes a balance between two conflicting interests: that of incentivizing creativity and innovation against promoting competition and freedom of trade. The tension between those two public interests has always existed and its appreciation is fundamental to understanding IP law. One instance where it appeared was in the Uruguay Round of negotiations of trade liberalization between 1986 and 1994 which led to the WTO agreement and TRIPS. Since 1994 IP protection has been one of the conditions of access to the markets of the leading industrial countries. TRIPS refers to four core treaties - Paris, Berne, Rome and Washington. These are the general protection treaties. Others, such as the PCT, Madrid and Hague, facilitate multiple patent, trade mark and registered design applications. There are classification agreements like Nice and Locarno and regional agreements like the European Patent Convention. The presentation considered the harmonization of European copyright, registered design and trade mark law and the Community trade mark and Community design regulations. It identified the core British statutes: the Patents Act 1977, Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, the Trade Marks Act 1994 and the Registered Designs Act 1949. It discussed also some of the more important secondary legislation such as the Patents, Trade Marks and Registered Designs Rules. Finally, it identified some of the sources of law in print and on the internet listing the materials that can be downloaded from the IPO, EPO, OHIM, WIPO and other sites.
As the legal landscape continues to evolve in terms of intellectual property law, the Los Angeles Business Journal once again turned to some of the leading IP attorneys and experts in the region to get their assessments regarding the current state of IP legislation, the new rules of copyright protection, licensing and technology, and the various trends that they have been observing, and in some cases, driving. Below is a series of questions the Business Journal posed to these experts and the unique responses they provided – offering a glimpse into the state of intellectual property law in 2014 – from the perspectives of those in the trenches of our region today.
A Report On The Patents Act, 1970 [Case Study : Apple Vs Samsung]Navitha Pereira
This report discusses about the Patents Act, 1970, and the purpose of a patent. It also goes through the case of Apple Vs Samsung and the judgement given by the court.
Starting May 13, significant changes in the law of design patents come into effect. First, the U.S. and Japan both join the Hague Agreement for the Registration of Industrial Designs. Second, all U.S. design patents filed May 13 or later will have a 15-year term from issuance. This is an increase from the current 14-year term. Third, starting May 13, applicants are no longer required to file a petition and pay fees to include color drawings in U.S. design applications.
The Federal Circuit Review is a monthly newsletter featuring the latest case summaries handed down from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
In this Issue:
Smartphone War Update: Some of Apple’s Patents Survive Invalidity Challenge
• Sale by Foreign Supplier Invalidated Patent
• District Court Abused Discretion in Refusing to Keep Confidential Documents Secret
The Trademark Review is a monthly newsletter prepared by Knobbe Martens attorneys covering relevant and current issues in trademark law.
In this Issue:
• Ron Paul’s Complaint to Regain RonPaul.org Constitutes Reverse Domain Hijacking
• MOTT’s for Baby Food Is Considered Primarily Merely a Surname
• Company Uses More than Is Reasonably Necessary to Advertise that its Test Strips Work with Another’s Meters
On March 30 and 31, 2017, Knobbe Martens attorneys presented written and oral educational material at an IP Seminar Series “Overseas Intellectual Property Rights Protection for Chinese Enterprises” sponsored by CHOFN, a Chinese IP law firm in Guangzhou and Shenzhen, China.
These are the slides of a presentation to solicitors, barristers and others at 4-5 Gray;s Inn Square on 26 June 2013. It defines intellectual property ("IP") as the legal protection of intellectual assets ("IA") which are the brands, designs, technology or creative works that give a business a competitive advantage over its rivals. The study discusses how the law protects each of those assets: brands by designs, passing off, geographical indications and registered designs, for example,. and technology by patents, the law of confidence, unregistered design right, plant breeders rights and copyright. However, IP rights create monopolies and restraints of trade that are as harmful as any other. The law that creates these rights also regulates their subsistence and exercise. Thus, IP law strikes a balance between two conflicting interests: that of incentivizing creativity and innovation against promoting competition and freedom of trade. The tension between those two public interests has always existed and its appreciation is fundamental to understanding IP law. One instance where it appeared was in the Uruguay Round of negotiations of trade liberalization between 1986 and 1994 which led to the WTO agreement and TRIPS. Since 1994 IP protection has been one of the conditions of access to the markets of the leading industrial countries. TRIPS refers to four core treaties - Paris, Berne, Rome and Washington. These are the general protection treaties. Others, such as the PCT, Madrid and Hague, facilitate multiple patent, trade mark and registered design applications. There are classification agreements like Nice and Locarno and regional agreements like the European Patent Convention. The presentation considered the harmonization of European copyright, registered design and trade mark law and the Community trade mark and Community design regulations. It identified the core British statutes: the Patents Act 1977, Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, the Trade Marks Act 1994 and the Registered Designs Act 1949. It discussed also some of the more important secondary legislation such as the Patents, Trade Marks and Registered Designs Rules. Finally, it identified some of the sources of law in print and on the internet listing the materials that can be downloaded from the IPO, EPO, OHIM, WIPO and other sites.
As the legal landscape continues to evolve in terms of intellectual property law, the Los Angeles Business Journal once again turned to some of the leading IP attorneys and experts in the region to get their assessments regarding the current state of IP legislation, the new rules of copyright protection, licensing and technology, and the various trends that they have been observing, and in some cases, driving. Below is a series of questions the Business Journal posed to these experts and the unique responses they provided – offering a glimpse into the state of intellectual property law in 2014 – from the perspectives of those in the trenches of our region today.
A Report On The Patents Act, 1970 [Case Study : Apple Vs Samsung]Navitha Pereira
This report discusses about the Patents Act, 1970, and the purpose of a patent. It also goes through the case of Apple Vs Samsung and the judgement given by the court.
What to know if it is your first rodeo in patent monetization.pptxturo6
What is patent monetization and how does it differ from a typical licensing deal?
The process of due diligence for patent monetization - how do you choose patents which would be great candidates for monetization?
What are some of the intangibles at institutions that prevent patent monetization?
How do you convince your institution about patent monetization?
The business model for patent monetization? Who pays for it? What's in it for me? What do net revenues vs gross revenue really mean in the context of monetization?
Legal considerations for patent monetization. What are some of the risks?
How long does it take? How do the recent policy changes and case law impact patent monetization?
Is patent monetization ethical?
These and many more topics will be covered in great detail with an opportunity to ask questions to the panelists who are world-leading experts in business, legal, and policy matters.
Patent Purchases and Litigation OutcomesErik Oliver
The sales market for patent rights and their valuation can be a difficult road to navigate. To help shed some light on this, we teamed up with Professor Mark Lemley of Stanford Law School to explore patent litigation outcomes. We analyzed our data based on ownership and source to test our intuitions about how successfully purchased patents can be litigated. The results may surprise you.
What to know if it is your first rodeo in patent monetization V2_19DN.pptxDipanjan "DJ" Nag
The top two monetization deals from universities have received more revenues than the combined revenues of technology transfer for all universities reporting to AUTM. Yet, patent monetization is often seen in a negative light. Corporate licensing relies heavily on patent monetization and a company like IBM produces close to two billion dollars in annual revenues year after year. There are certain nuances of patent monetization that a university should adopt, which can be regarded as ethical licensing. The cornerstone of ethical licensing is to ensure patents utilized in a monetization campaign are of the highest quality and that the university takes every precaution to preserve its reputation. If it is the first time that a university is considering patent monetization, certain best practices from the corporate side before launching a campaign. This panel of highly experienced patent monetization experts will discuss the financials, due diligence, public perceptions, and legal implications of carrying out a highly successful patent monetization program.
Сергей Уляхин "Аспекты коммерциализации интеллектуальной собственности" (S.Ul...EconMsu
Лекция Сергея Уляхина про особенности коммерциализации интеллектуальной собственности.
Лекция была проведена в рамках межфакультетского курса МГУ "Экономика инноваций: как запустить технологический проект?". Подробнее о курсе - https://vk.com/mfk_ei
Patenting in Mobile Application and TechnologyIndicThreads
Presented By Komal Shah Bhukhanwala at the 2nd IndicThreads.com Conference On Mobile Application Development, August 2011 http://Mobile.IndicThreads.com
What to know if it is your first rodeo in patent monetization?Dipanjan "DJ" Nag
What to know if it is your first rodeo in patent monetization
The top two monetization deals from universities have received more revenues than the combined revenues of technology transfer for all universities reporting to AUTM. Yet, patent monetization is often seen in a negative light. Corporate licensing relies heavily on patent monetization and a company like IBM produces close to two billion dollars in annual revenues year after year. There are certain nuances of patent monetization that a university should adopt, which can be regarded as ethical licensing. The cornerstone of ethical licensing is to ensure patents utilized in a monetization campaign are of the highest quality and that the university takes every precaution to preserve its reputation. If it is the first time that a university is considering patent monetization, certain best practices from the corporate side before launching a campaign. This panel of highly experienced patent monetization experts will discuss the financials, due diligence, public perceptions, and legal implications of carrying out a highly successful patent monetization program.
PGRT Basics (Series: IP 301 Post-Grant Review Trials 2020)Financial Poise
This segment will discuss the statutory and procedural background of post-grant review proceedings. It will discuss the types of proceedings available and provide a high-level discussion of how the proceedings are conducted.
To view the accompanying webinar, go to: https://www.financialpoise.com/financial-poise-webinars/pgrt-basics-2020/
2. General Patent Corporation (GPC) is the
premier intellectual property boutique
focusing on:
IP licensing and enforcement
IP Advisory services
2
3. GPC was founded by Alex Poltorak in 1987.
GPC is the oldest Patent Licensing and
Enforcement Company (PLEC) in the US.
GPC is the leading PLEC in the US.
GPC offers assertive licensing and IP
enforcement on a contingency basis.
3
4. GPC Licensing and Enforcement Services:
Assertive Patent licensing
IP Enforcement on a contingency basis
GPC Advisory Services:
IP Strategy
IP Valuation
IP Management
IP Brokerage
4
5. We at General Patent are committed to
helping inventors and scientists realize the
fruits of their creative genius. We enable
them to exercise their intellectual property
rights by providing IP enforcement and
assertive licensing on a contingency basis.
Our mission is to secure an equitable
reward for the use of your creativity.
5
6. The patent system works well for large corporations, but
breaks down for small patent owners. By leveling the
playing field, we make the system work for everyone.
GPC balances the scales of justice by enabling individual
inventors and patent owners to exercise their rights. In
the eternal struggle of David vs. Goliath, we champion the
cause of small inventors, universities and R&D companies.
In our Vision we see scientists, engineers, inventors, and
other creative people justly rewarded for their creativity,
sharing in the wealth they created by their genius.
6
8. IP Holdings LLC is an IP-centric Merchant
Banking Organization. Services include:
IP Litigation Finance
IP Brokerage
Idea Incubator:
Patent holding companies
Early-stage start-ups
8
10. Unit in IP Holdings Idea Incubator
Already Secured Five Patents
Potential Applications in Development
of New Drugs
Plan to License Patents
to Researchers
10
11. Helps patent owners sell (or license)
their IP
Represents buyers of patents
IP Consulting Services
M&A and equity investment due diligence
IP strategy
recommendations
and implementation
11
15. IP Portfolio includes four patents
covering “smart” connectors
26 litigations
150+ licensees
Over 98% of all PC cards (PCMCIA)
licensed
15
16. ACT owns patent portfolio related to
transaction cards (gift cards, phone cards
and loyalty cards)
Currently 26 licensees under the ACT
patents, including 5 of the largest card
companies.
16
17. Moen Technologies LL owns a patent
portfolio related to debit platform interactive
telecommunications and e-commerce;
Successfully sued Coca-Cola and Pepsi;
Patent portfolio has been subsequently sold.
17
18. Scieran Technologies invented and patented
ophthalmologic surgical instruments;
GPC successfully sued Bausch & Lomb on
behalf of Scieran Technologies for patent
infringement under the Scieran patent
portfolio;
Bausch & Lomb agreed to settle the lawsuit
and license Scieran patents;
This project is now closed.
18
19. Winning Edge (formerly GWIN) owns a patent
portfolio related to online sports handicapping
Sued:
Corcom, Inc. d/b/a Don Best Sports
Preferred Picks Publications, Inc.
Vegas Experts.com
Vegas Insider.com
Sportsdirect and Covers Media Group Limited
Pregame LLC
1402487 Ontario Limited
IGC Entertainment Corp. and National Sports Services (IGC)
Moseman Enterprises, Inc..
19
20. Nature’s First owns a patent portfolio related
to the use of agglomerated milk powder in
beverages;
Sued Kraft Foods, Sara Lee and Canteen;
Kraft settled and licensed the patents
Currently in litigation with Sara Lee and
Canteen
20
21. DTL owns a patent on digital transducer
Sued:
Cingular – ;
AT&T – ;
T-Mobile – ;
Additional defendants remain in litigation.
21
23. Regional Carriers:
SRT Communications
IT&E Overseas
Mid-Rivers Telephone
Copper Valley Wireless
Silver Star Telephone
SKT Wireless
Etex Communications
Syringa Wireless
Cleartalk
Thumb Cellular
South Central Communications
Peoples Wireless
Panhandle Telecommunication
Inland Cellular
Cellular 29 Plus
Mohave Cellular
Golden State Cellular
Farmers Mutual Telephone
23
24. Evaluate Viability of the Claim
Merits
Validity
Financial Return
Other Factors
Identify Infringers
Minimize Patent Owner’s
Liability
Select Law Firm(s)
Supervise/Coordinate Law
Firm(s)
Provide Strategic Direction
Patent Reexamination
Patent Continuation(s)
Underwrite All Litigation Expenses
(Disbursements)
Filing Fees
Travel Costs
Depositions
Expert Witnesses
Trial Demonstratives
Jury Consultants
Mock Jury Trials
Reexaminations and Continuations
Settlement Negotiations
Licensing Negotiations
Monitor Royalty Payments
Maintain the Patent(s)
24
25. The New York Times – “Trying to Cash in on
Patents,” by Teresa Riordan, June 10, 2002
CNNfn – Alexander Poltorak interviewed on
“Business Unusual” in May 2002 and “Your
Money” in August 2003; Paul Lerner
interviewed on “Your Money” in May 2004
Documentary by Japanese TV - Tokyo Ch. 12.
IP Investor – “He wrote the book” April 2007.
25
27. Founder, Chairman and CEO;
Emigrated from the former U.S.S.R.
in 1982, where he was awarded a
Doctorate in Physics ;
Served as an Assistant Professor of
Biomathematics at Cornell University
Medical College;
Served as an Assistant Professor of
Physics at Touro College;
Served as an Adjunct Professor of
Law at the Globe Institute of
Technology;
Formerly CEO of a public company.
27
28. General Counsel since 1999;
B.S. in Aeronautical Engineering from
Purdue University;
M.B.A. from Loyola University;
J.D. from DePaul University; and
Post-graduate legal studies at John
Marshall College of Law.
Has led IP law departments at Olin Corp.,
Black & Decker Corp., and multi-national
electrical construction giant Asea Brown
Boveri, Inc.
28
29. Chief IP Counsel;
B.S. in Applied Mathematics from
Columbia University in 1988;
J.D. from Georgetown University in
1995;
Formerly President of Furnace Brook
LLC, a patent licensing and
enforcement company; and
Partner at Pennie & Edmonds LLP
29
30. Vice President, GPC;
President, IPOfferings;
B.S. Electrical Engineering from
CCNY;
M.S. Computer Engineering from
Syracuse University;
Vice President Intellectual Property
& Licensing at IBM
CEO of ARGI, a Database Software
Company
CLP and IAM 250 Strategist
30
31. How to contact GPC:
General Patent Corporation
Montebello Park
Suffern, NY 10952-3746
Tel: +1 (845) 368-4000
Fax: +1 (845) 368-8770
www.generalpatent.com
info@generalpatent.com
31
32. Follow GPC on:
Patent and IP Enforcement News:
blog:www.patent-enforcement.blogspot.com
Facebook:
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Suffern-
NY/General-Patent-Corporation/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/GeneralPatent
32