<?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>nun-o &#124; New Useful Non-Obvious &#187; Legal Information</title>
	<atom:link href="http://nun-o.com/tag/legal-information/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://nun-o.com</link>
	<description>Talking about Intellectual Property</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 29 Jun 2010 14:30:53 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Patent Law Round-UP</title>
		<link>http://nun-o.com/2009/05/22/patent-law-round-up/</link>
		<comments>http://nun-o.com/2009/05/22/patent-law-round-up/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2009 13:44:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>robsuarez</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Patent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal Circuit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[In re Bilski]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Intellectual property]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[KSR v. Teleflex]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Legal Information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent infringement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Services]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Services]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Supreme Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[United States]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nun-o.com/?p=29</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[



Image via Wikipedia



As in all areas of Law, Patent Law evolves over time and is molded by cases decided in the Supreme Court and the Federal Circuit Courts.  According to &#8220;Patent Law and Practice, Sixth Edition&#8221; by Herbert F. Schwartz and Robert J. Goldman, here are the major cases currently impacting patent law:

In re Bilski [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="zemanta-img" style="display: block; margin: 1em;">
<div>
<dl class="wp-caption alignleft" style="width: 310px;">
<dt class="wp-caption-dt"><a href="http://commons.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:US_Supreme_Court_%2835650678%29.jpg"><img title="When the seat of the federal government was tr..." src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a8/US_Supreme_Court_%2835650678%29.jpg/300px-US_Supreme_Court_%2835650678%29.jpg" alt="When the seat of the federal government was tr..." width="300" height="225" /></a></dt>
<dd class="wp-caption-dd zemanta-img-attribution" style="font-size: 0.8em;">Image via <a href="http://commons.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:US_Supreme_Court_%2835650678%29.jpg">Wikipedia</a></dd>
</dl>
</div>
</div>
<p>As in all areas of Law, <a class="zem_slink" title="Patent" rel="wikipedia" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent">Patent Law</a> evolves over time and is molded by cases decided in the <a class="zem_slink" title="Supreme court" rel="wikipedia" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_court">Supreme Court</a> and the <a class="zem_slink" title="United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit" rel="homepage" href="http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/">Federal Circuit</a> Courts.  According to &#8220;<a href="http://storefront.bnabooks.com/epages/bnastore.sf/bnastore.sf/?ObjectPath=/Shops/bnastore/Products/1712" target="_blank">Patent Law and Practice, Sixth Edition</a>&#8221; by <a onclick="window.open('http://storefront.bnabooks.com/WebRoot/Store/Shops/bnastore/pdf/plp6Aboutauthors.pdf','PopUp','scrollbars=yes,resizable=yes,toolbar=yes,status=yes,width=500,height=500,left='+(screen.availWidth/2-250)+',top='+(screen.availHeight/2-250)+'');return false;" href="http://storefront.bnabooks.com/WebRoot/Store/Shops/bnastore/pdf/plp6Aboutauthors.pdf"><span style="color: #005f95;">Herbert F. Schwartz</span></a> and <a onclick="window.open('http://storefront.bnabooks.com/WebRoot/Store/Shops/bnastore/pdf/plp6AboutAuthors.pdf','PopUp','scrollbars=yes,resizable=yes,toolbar=yes,status=yes,width=500,height=500,left='+(screen.availWidth/2-250)+',top='+(screen.availHeight/2-250)+'');return false;" href="http://storefront.bnabooks.com/WebRoot/Store/Shops/bnastore/pdf/plp6AboutAuthors.pdf"><span style="color: #005f95;">Robert J. Goldman</span></a>, here are the major cases currently impacting patent law:</p>
<ul>
<li><a href="http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/opinions/07-1130%20order.pdf" target="_blank">In re Bilski (2008, Fed. Cir. en banc),</a> in which the Federal Circuit established a new standard for the patentability of business method processes and algorithms.</li>
<li><a href="http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/05pdf/05-130.pdf" target="_blank"><em>eBay, Inc. v. MercExchange, LLC</em> (2006,S.Ct.), </a>in which the Supreme Court overturned the test applied by the Federal Circuit relating to the availability of permanent injunctions in patent litigation</li>
<li><a href="http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/06pdf/05-608.pdf" target="_blank"><em>MedImmune, Inc. v. Genentech, Inc.</em> (2007, S.Ct),</a> in which the Supreme Court expanded the availability of <a class="zem_slink" title="Declaratory ruling" rel="wikipedia" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaratory_ruling">declaratory judgment</a> jurisdiction for companies seeking to challenge the patent of another</li>
<li><a href="http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/06pdf/04-1350.pdf" target="_blank"><em>KSR Int’l v. Teleflex, Inc.</em>, (2007, S.Ct),</a> in which the Supreme Court revisited the law of invalidity for obviousness for the first time in a generation, revising the standard applied by the Federal Circuit since the 1980s</li>
<li><a href="http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/opinions/M830.pdf" target="_blank"><em>In re Seagate Tech., LLC</em> (2007, Fed. Cir<em>. en banc</em>),</a> in which the Federal Circuit reversed 24 years of decisions and established a new standard for assessing willful <a class="zem_slink" title="Patent infringement" rel="wikipedia" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent_infringement">infringement</a>, a precursor to an award of increased damages and attorneys&#8217; fees Critical new issues addressed.</li>
</ul>
<div class="zemanta-pixie" style="margin-top: 10px; height: 15px;"><img class="zemanta-pixie-img" style="float: right;" src="http://img.zemanta.com/pixy.gif?x-id=cf8c04bf-ed41-423b-bdd1-b2be14b8d1ec" alt="" /><span class="zem-script more-related pretty-attribution"><script src="http://static.zemanta.com/readside/loader.js" type="text/javascript"></script></span></div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://nun-o.com/2009/05/22/patent-law-round-up/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
