Aurora Patents

VERY EXCITING NEWS! The RESTORE Patent Rights Act has been reintroduced in the 119th Congress! It's a bipartisan and bicameral bill with primary co-sponsors Senators Cotton (R-AR) and Christopher Coons (D-DE) and Representatives Nathaniel Moran (R-TX) and Madeleine Dean (D-PA). It's a single-sentence bill that abrogates the 4-factor test created by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2006 that has resulted in the elimination of injunctions as a remedy for patent infringement, which has contributed to massive predatory infringement of innovators' rights today. The RESTORE Patent Rights Act returns the U.S. patent system back to the legal rule applied by federal courts from 1790 until 2006 in securing the property rights of patent owners suffering continuing infringement -- a presumptive right to an injunction. This was the property doctrine that rightly protected great American innovators like Thomas Edison, the Wright Brothers, Alexander Graham Bell, Samuel Morse, Charles Goodyear, and hundreds of others who launched the U.S. innovation economy and made modern life a veritable miracle by any historical standard. More information here: https://lnkd.in/eqCjb8Ue

So, your patent application got rejected. Now what? 💔 In this month’s podcast episode, we’re talking about rejection. Specifically, the type that comes from the patent office in the form of an intimidating-sounding three-digit number when an examiner swipes left on your application. But isn’t that a sad topic, you might be wondering, to be kicking off a new season with – and especially following the predictable heartbreak that comes packaged with the recent Valentine's Holiday?!? To the contrary! To paraphrase life coach Steve Maraboli, every time you think you’re being rejected from something good, you’re actually being re-directed to something better. No need to stock up on antidepressants or binge on a box of chocolates. In this therapeutic start to our fifth season, we’ll be unpacking why rejection isn’t the end of your relationship with innovation but, instead, just the start of the dance. ** Episode Overview ** Patent Office Relationship Guru Daniel Wright leads a discussion with our all-star patent panel, delving deeply into defining, coping with, and then dealing with patent application rejection. Along the way, Dan and the panel discuss: ⦿ Why patent applications are rejected ⦿ The specific types of rejection ⦿ And strategies for how to overcome each, including some wonderful insights specifically on how to work with examiners on the human level to overcome rejection. Dan and I are joined by our always exceptional group of IP experts, including: ⦿ Dr. David Jackrel, President of Jackrel Consulting ⦿ Kristen Hansen, Patent Strategy Specialist at Aurora ⦿ Ty Davis, Patent Strategy Associate at Aurora ⦿ Marie Smyth, Patent Agent at Brake Hughes Bellermann LLP  ** Mossoff Minute ** In this month’s minute, Professor Adam Mossoff debunks the myth that patents in the United States are monopolies that impede innovation and block economic growth.  ** Next Episode Preview: ParkerVision and Rule 36 ** We’re excited to announce that we'll be releasing a very special episode next month, in which we’ll be interviewing Jeff Parker, the CEO of ParkerVision, Amit Vora, counsel for ParkerVision, and Juliette Fassett, a board member of Fair Inventing and Founder and CEO of Happy Products, Inc. ParkerVision is filing a U.S. Supreme Court Cert Petition challenging the Federal Circuit’s practice of issuing one-word affirmations in cases that hold life-altering implications for inventors. This practice is referred to as application of Rule 36. ParkerVision’s petition aims to establish a baseline of judicial respect for patent holders, as judicial reasoning is key to what makes a court decision a valid court decision. #patents #inventors #prosecution #examination #uspto #eligibility #enablement #invention #rejection #scotus #innovation #CAFC #PTAB #Rule36 #101 #102 #103 #112 https://lnkd.in/gAzURcGB

Are patents monopolies? Emphatically, no! This is an all-too-common misconception and another myth Professor Adam Mossoff helps us debunk in the latest Mossoff Minute. Patents are property rights envisioned in the U.S. Constitution and defined by hundreds of years of statute as old as our country. Patents do confer exclusive rights to the use of something – but are no more a monopoly than any other exclusive property right, including the deed to your land, which grants exclusive rights to use, lease, and sell your physical property. Monopolies explicitly prohibit others from competing in a marketplace. On the other hand, patents promote competition via public disclosure and licensing and do not prohibit someone from competing in a marketplace any more than the title to your home prevents someone from living in your neighborhood. In this month's minute, Adam explains the origins of this misconception and lays out the overwhelming historical record of how these property rights have driven economic growth, created jobs, promoted flourishing societies, and democratized innovation!! For the non-TL;DR version, also check out Adam's most recent contribution to The Heritage Foundation that goes much deeper on this important topic: https://lnkd.in/gWaT8z_f #patents #innovation #monopoly #history #constitution #economicpolicy #invention #property #rights #jobs #growth

What will MAGA mean for patents?!? In our final love letter to the Chinese spies at TikTok before the pending shutdown and ahead of next week's Presidential Inauguration, Professor Adam Mossoff unpacks what the incoming Trump Administration could mean for patent rights. What's the impact of Elon Musk having Trump's ear? And how will the rise of populism and libertarian perspectives influence intellectual property policy for the next four years? Embedding the video here so it's still available after the pending TikTok shutdown. Please drop your own predictions in the comments below!

Please join me at 20Fathoms tomorrow for our newest talk: Don't Waste Your Money on Patents. Description: You’ve put too much into your innovation to come up short when its life depends on the measure of your patent. In the eyes of the patent office, judges, juries, PTAB admins, ITC officials, and IP-savvy investors, it doesn’t really matter how great, novel, or universe-denting your invention is if it is not properly defined and protected by your patent. The difference between a good patent and a bad one is the difference between a valuable, assertable, defendable property right – and a worthless vanity plate. The quality that goes in up front is directly proportional to the leverage it will give you later when you need it most. But what goes into a quality patent, and where possible, how do you get it without breaking the bank? Answering these questions will be the focus of our discussion. Register: https://lnkd.in/gV96npej #patents #ptab #CAFC #ITC #USPTO #investment #intellectualproperty #startupstrategy #venturecapital

In our latest article, "Aurora Patents is Seeking a Medical Device and Software Patent Agent (Remote)", author JobOrtunities Help Wanted wrote"Aurora Patents is looking for a Medical Device and Software Patent Agent (fully remote) to help with patent portfolio management, application drafting, prosecution, and strategy. This is a fully remote, full-time, or part-time role (your choice!) with a flexible work week. The position is salaried for a guaranteed 30 hours per week (part-time) or 40 hours per week (full-time) and payable at an equivalent hourly rate for any hours above. Benefits include 401k with match and paid time off."

🚨 BIG step in supporting #inventors... Breaking news in #patent policy: The PREVAIL Act moves forward in #Congress! In the latest Mossoff Minute, Professor Adam Mossoff discusses this crucial step toward restoring the stability of patent rights and boosting #innovation. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (#PTAB) has been  engaging in willy-nilly decision-making, canceling issued patents at rates of 80 to 90 percent. This has destabilized the innovation #economy and hurt inventors in ways beyond measure. The PREVAIL Act, which finally moved out of committee, could bring much-needed #legislative #reform to patents and long overdue support for #inventors. It's now up to the United States Senate to do the right thing! Mossoff Minute // Patently Strategic #Podcast #shorts

An invention cannot be patented if the differences between your claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was conceived. Determining obviousness – and the validity of your patent – is more than simply establishing that the invention doesn’t already exist and that it isn’t documented elsewhere. Its conception must also not have otherwise been obvious to those in the field at the time. If you’re thinking that sounds awfully subjective in the present and highly susceptible to hindsight bias in the future, you’d be right. Beyond being one of the four main drivers for patent application rejection at examination time, obviousness is also one of the primary vectors used by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board for invalidating patents via Inter Partes Review, so it’s essential to get this right, so as to limit your patent’s potential invalidation surface area. ** Episode Overview ** In the final podcast episode of our 2024 season, Kristen Hansen, Patent Strategy Specialist at Aurora Patents, and Dr. David Jackrel, President of Jackrel Consulting, lead today’s two-part discussion with our all-star panel, dissecting recent court decisions impacting the core patenting issue of obviousness. These high-profile cases involve essential lessons learned from big names like Apple, Motorola Solutions, ParkerVision, Crocs, Inc., Qualcomm, Intel Corporation, Novartis, and Regeneron. In breaking this all down in terms of how obviousness has been playing out in the courts, Dave, Kristen, and the panel discuss: ⦿ Inter Partes Review and how some PTAB strategy deviates from conventional patenting wisdom when it comes to obviousness. ⦿ Recent obviousness case law decisions. ⦿ Practice tips related to obviousness, including analysis of how previously invalidated claims impact future claims, the dangers of being your own lexicographer, and the strategic importance of drafting backup positions in your specification. ** Mossoff Minute: PREVAIL Advances ** In this month's Mossoff Minute, Professor Adam Mossoff discusses some incredibly exciting news about the PREVAIL Act, which is designed to bring much overdue reform to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. ** Discussion Panel ** Kristen, Dave, and I are joined today by our always exceptional group of IP experts, including: ⦿ Ty Davis, Patent Strategy Associate at Aurora ⦿ Daniel Wright Patent Strategist at Aurora ⦿ Marie Smyth, Patent Agent at Brake Hughes Bellermann LLP 🎧 Listen: https://lnkd.in/gtUXC9zS #patents #propertyrights #obviousness #CAFC #PREVAIL #IP #PTAB #apple #motorola #parkervision #crocs #qualcomm #intel #novartis #regeneron

Today, my white paper on the RESTORE Patent Rights Act was published by the The Heritage Foundation: "Restoring the American Innovation Engine: Congress Should Consider Enacting the RESTORE Patent Rights Act." https://lnkd.in/ed3DU3vT My white paper explains how the RESTORE Patent Rights Act redresses the serious legal and economic problems created by the Supreme Court in 2006 in its decision in eBay v. MercExchange. It explains how and why injuncitons matter for all property rights - including patents - because injunctions are the backstop to commercial negotiations and other economic activity in the free market. It then details how RESTORE achieves the goal of restoring this key feature of property rights in inventions through a simple, single-sentence amendment that is clear and concise for judges or lawyers in applying historical, equitable remedy doctrines like injunctions. Even if lawyers or judges are still confused or mistaken, RESTORE contains explicit factual and legal congressional findings to serve as a fail safe to ensure that these lawyers are disabused of their errors. In sum, the RESTORE Patent Rights Act would return the U.S. innovation engine to its efficient operation in law and commerce. #PatentsMatter #FixInjunctions #RESTORE #innovation Thank you to all the co-sponsors of RESTORE: Christopher Coons Tom Cotton Nathaniel Moran Madeleine Dean Representative Chip Roy Deborah Ross Henry "Hank" Johnson, Jr. Scott Peters for Congress

⛔️ Patent examiners can make mistakes. Patent office clerks can misfile paperwork and cause procedural errors. The software tools, document formats like DOCX, and the IT systems your application passes through can have bugs. What recourse do you have when quality issues creep in at this stage? This is where petition practice – the focus of this month's podcast episode – fortunately, comes to the rescue! ** Guest Hosts: Julie Burke and Michael Spector ** To help us navigate this potentially patent-saving topic, we’ve enlisted the help of a guest host who’s spent considerable time in the belly of the beast. Julie Burke rose up at the USPTO to become a Quality Assurance Specialist – the type of manager you’d call when your case got off track. During this time, she handled more than 900 petitions at the patent office! Julie is also joined by the co-founder of Petition.ai, Michael Spector. ** Episode Overview ** In today’s deep dive on petition practice, Julie, Michael, and our all-star patent panel discuss: ⦿ How and why errors occur at the PTO, especially during the examination process ⦿ How petitions can be used to correct procedural errors ⦿ Common myths about petitioning examiner errors ⦿ Practice tips for getting the most out of petitioning ⦿ How petitioning can be used strategically to get a management-level review of the patent application after final rejection ** Discussion Panel ** Julie, Michael, and I are joined today by our always exceptional group of IP experts, including: ⦿ David Jackrel, President of Jackrel Consulting ⦿ Kristen Hansen, Patent Strategy Specialist at Aurora ⦿ Ty Davis, Patent Strategy Associate at Aurora ⦿ Marie Smyth, Patent Agent at Brake Hughes Bellermann LLP ** Mossoff Minute ** In this month’s Mossoff Minute, Professor Adam Mossoff debunks the myth that the patent system is flooded with bad patents. For over a decade, there has been a narrative driven by Big Tech that the patent system is broken, with a high percentage of “bad patents.” Professor Mossoff discusses a recent rigorous study by The Sunwater Institute (a nonpartisan think tank) that reviewed 20 million patent claims and found that only 7% of claims are erroneously granted by the USPTO, while 18% of valid claims are erroneously rejected! 🎧 Listen: https://lnkd.in/gvQs8rdE #patents #petitions #podcast #patentquality #patentprosecution #ip #inventors #startuptips #intellectualproperty #examination #rejection #ai