For meetings and deliveries:
12 Veterans Square
1st Floor Left
Media, PA 19063 U.S.A.
P.O. Box 209
Swarthmore, PA 19081-0209 U.S.A.
Phone: (610) 892-9942
Twitter: @TechLaw_Elman and @ElmanTechNews
eFax: (925) 226-4995
- Selected Developments in Biotechnology Law and the Biotechnology Industry
- Informed Consent and Ethical Review in Chinese Human Experimentation: Reflections on the “Golden Rice Event”
- Q&A Session with Dr. Andrew W. Torrance of the University of Kansas School of Law: On the Question: Is Copyright the Way to Gain Intellectual Property Protection for DNA Sequences?
On May 30, 2012, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) put further gloss on the term “common sense” as used by the Supreme Court in the 2007 case of KSR v. Teleflex.
This new case (Mintz v. Dietz & Watson) involved a patent on casings for hot dogs with a woven mesh pattern. The CAFC opinion criticized the district court for finding the patent claim to have been obvious, under the “common sense” rubric. The CAFC explained that “common sense” is a “shorthand label for knowledge so basic that it certainly lies within the skill set of an ordinary artisan.”
- Oct. 20, 2014 – Meet Steve Zeman and get tips about European Patent Office practice
- Supreme Court, snowed by ACLU smear campaign, resurrects archaic requirement of “invention” as a test of patent eligibility.
- State of Vermont Declares War on “Patent Trolls”
- Are Human Genes Patentable?—The Experts Weigh In
- Spark Your Creativity: participate online in Tina Seelig’s MOOC via Stanford’s Venture Lab
- Viability of Certain Internet and Software Patents Reconfirmed in DDR Holdings, LLC v. Hotels.com
- Versata Software, Inc. v. Callidus Software, Inc.: Guidance on Stays Pending Post-Issuance Proceedings
- Patent and IP Wishes 2015
- United States Patent and Trademark Office Interim Guidance on Subject Matter Eligibility
- “I Told the Waiter There Was a Fly in My Soup!” - A Little More Freedom for User Outrage on Yelp and other Social Media Sites
- The Internet of Things and Canadian Copyright Law