About the Authors

  • The Authors and Contributors of "Patent Docs" are patent attorneys and agents, many of whom hold doctorates in a diverse array of disciplines.
2018 Juristant Badge - MBHB_165
Juristat #4 Overall Rank

E-mail Newsletter

  • Enter your e-mail address below to receive the "Patent Docs" e-mail newsletter.

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Contact the Docs

Docs on Twitter


Disclaimer

  • "Patent Docs" does not contain any legal advice whatsoever. This weblog is for informational purposes only, and its publication does not create an attorney-client relationship. In addition, nothing on "Patent Docs" constitutes a solicitation for business. This weblog is intended primarily for other attorneys. Moreover, "Patent Docs" is the personal weblog of the Authors; it is not edited by the Authors' employers or clients and, as such, no part of this weblog may be so attributed. All posts on "Patent Docs" should be double-checked for their accuracy and current applicability.
Juristat_165
Juristat #8 Overall Rank

Pharma-50-transparent_216px_red

« IPO Webinar on IP Protection for Data | Main | Patent Docs Celebrates 13 Years of Operation »

October 20, 2019

Comments

Nicely written. An interesting exercise would be to find examples of inventions, if any, that cannot be readily dismissed as unpatentable in the eyes of a sufficiently hostile or ignorant judge.

Washington DC, October 21, 2019. The US Supreme Court today took the unusual step of issuing a per curiam opinion concurring in the denial of certiorari in the widely-reported Edison Light Bulb case.
"Rarely have we more whole-heartedly agreed with the Federal Circuit than in this case," stated Associate Justice B. from the bench. Squinting in the soft candle light he continued: "We have long held that patents must be kept within their legitimate scope, or else they tie up technological progress. Today, our nation enjoys the wonders of steam propulsion, of wondrous physicks compounded by our skilled apothecaries. Even telephony, we are told, will soon be within our technological reach. With patents like these, none of that would have come to pass." While solemn mumbles of agreement were heard from the other Justices, there were also moments of levity. One Justice stated "I like lightbulbs. Do you like lightbulbs?", triggering jokes from other members of the Court about the Federal Circuit as "people with propeller hats."

Stop hurting me.

The parody refutes itself, which is kind of meta. 223,898 would not be invalidated under Alice by the CAFC- although anything can happen at any time with any law when you have a raft of unqualified district judges.

That said, Alice is a 112/103 test and should not be an eligibility test...

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

December 2019

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31