The Dolcera Blog

The US India IP conclave on Information technology organized at Taj Krishna, Hyderabad started on a low note with the news of death of YS Rajasekhara Reddy, Chief Minister Andhra Pradesh in helicopter crash on 3rd September 2009.
The two days event organized by CII (confederation of Indian Industry) in association with USPTO Global Intellectual Property academy soon started to blaze as reputed panelist, both Indian bureaucrats and members of US embassy started addressing the audience. Welcome address was given by Shakti Sagar, Vice Chairman CII_AP & MD ADP Inida Pvt LTd. Theme address was given by Dominic Keating, IPR Attaché where he applauded Indian IT industries for their contributions to Indian economy. He mentioned that IT business has grown from 150 million US $ in 1991 to 50 billion US$ in 2007 and is further expected to rise to 900 billion US $ by 2020. Hyderabad alone exports IT worth 163 billion US $ and has shown a growth of 323% from year 2002.

GS Ragahavender, Registrar of copyrights, Copyright office, Government of India in his key note address discussed about legislation, management and enforcement as three pillars to assure working of IP laws. Cornelis M Keur, Consul General, US Consulate admired Andhra Pradesh as third state after Maharashtra and Gujarat in terms of growth in Economy. Concluding remarks of the inaugural session was given by Dr. S Chakravarthy, IAS(R), Advisor-APTDC.

Soon after a short coffee break the conference resumed on special plenary: The digital dilemma: Intellectual property in the information age. Dr. A Garg, Director-IPR department of Information technology, Govt of India emphasized that SMEs (small and medium enterprises) has to play a leading role in innovation. Incubation parks, multiplier grand scheme, SIP-EIT (support international patent protection in electronics and IT) have been started by government to support innovation. Under SIP-EIT, a financial support of upto 50% of total patent processing cost including Attorney’s fees, patent office filling fees, examination fees, patent search cost and additional cost for entering national phase up to grant/issue will be given. The support will be in the form of reimbursement of expenses in actual to the applicant. Support will however be limited to Rs. 15 lakhs or 50% if the total incurred on filling each invention, whichever is less.

Prof M Sridhar Acharyulu, MHRD IP chair professior, NALSAR, Jennie Ness, Regional Inteleecual propery Attaché for South east Asia US embassy Bangkok and Madhukar Sinha, Prof-IPR, center for WTO studies, IIFT shared their knowledge on various dilemmas to be confront in the rapidly growing age of IT.

Third session on strategies for protection of incremental innovation and patentability of software: challenges for IT/software industry started after high-lunch. The session was mainly headed by corporate professionals enlightening on Indian, US and European laws on software patenting and copyrights. BLV Rao, VP- corporate affairs, Infotech enterprise Ltd initiated the session with a focus on incremental innovations. Dawn Jos, Pat Engg-Asia, Texas instrument was next speaker in the session. Himanshu Goswami, IP attorney, Microsoft India and Santanu Mukherjee, lead-IPR attorney, Qualcomm India discussed intrinsic details on IT and Indian patent article 3 (k), European article 52 (2), 52 (3) and US laws on software patenting.

Dominic Keating unfolded the legalities of patenting software and business methods in US. Anil Sharma, Knowledge scientist Dolcera took the stage and discussed one of the most talked about cases in US, “In re Bilski & its implications on software patents.” The presentation kindled interest amongst the audience from the word go. The talk showcased the research work that Dolcera had undertaken in collaboration with Medtronic in Bilski case and its impact on software, medical devices and pharma method patents.

The last session of the day was on open source software: who needs IP, was chaired by Venkatesh Hariharan, Director, corporate affairs, Redhat Asia-Pacific, Prof. KS Rajan, IIIT-Hyderabad and Pavan Duggal, leading advocate in the Supreme Court of India. The panelists presented their views on pros and cons of free software versus paid software in context of IP and public interest.

The conclave was a major success and big boost to the city of Hyderabad. The city being an IT hub and IPR industries and law firms already budding, conferences like such will enhance awareness amongst the professionals. Overall, the conclave was a great experience and CII - USPTO effort to increase IP awareness in India is definitely commendable.

Tweet  Delicious  Digg  Facebook 

The objective and target of any organization is growth at 45 degree on x & Y axis through best products, best services etc… with latest innovations. Ever since recession has hit the western market the economy and jobs are melting like never before, chapter 11 filing cases are increasing. After all to run an organization revenue has to be generated. As newspapers across North America and the globe continue to flood with stories of economic downturn and businesses fighting to survive, organizations this month are placing a renewed focus on innovation and revenue generation.

Revenue generation through patent lawsuits is the new trend. 35 patent lawsuits have been filed just in 5 plus month time during 2009, wonder how many more are there. Surely first half of 2009 is not good for Google in terms of lawsuits, total 14 lawsuit are been battled.

Lawsuit filing cases of 2009:

1. Aloft Media, LLC v. Yahoo! Inc. et al
2. Performance Pricing, Inc. v. Google Inc. et al
3. Leader Technologies Inc. v. Facebook Inc.
4. Actus, LLC v. Bank of America Corp. et al
5. Paid Search Engine Tools, LLC v. Google, Inc. et al
6. ESN LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc. et al
7. Heartland Recreational Vehicles LLC v. Forest River Inc
8. Software Rights Archive, LLC v. Google Inc. et al
9. Northeastern University et al v. Google, Inc.,
10. Polaris IP, LLC v. Google Inc. et al
11. Function Media, L.L.C. v. Google, Inc. et al
12. Aloft Media, LLC v. Google, Inc.
13. GraphOn Corporation v. Google Inc.
14. Google, Inc. v. EMSAT Advanced Geo-Location Technology, LLC et al
15. Picsel (Research) Ltd. et al v. Apple Inc.
16. Web Tracking Solutions, Inc. et al v. Google, Inc.
17. Association For Molecular Pathology et al v. United States Patent and Trademark Office et al
18. Cygnus Systems, Inc. v. Microsoft Corporation, et al
19. Google Inc. et al v. Egger et al
20. Certicom Corporation et al v. Sony Corporation et al
21. Klausner Technologies Inc v. Verizon Wireless et al
22. Clark v. The Walt Disney Company et al
23. HYPERPHRASE TECHNOLOGIES, LLC v. GOOGLE INC.
24. BabyAge..com, Inc. v. Leachco, Inc.
25. IP Innovation LLC et al v. Google, Inc.
26. Elan Microelectronics Corporation v. Apple, Inc.
27. Bid for Position, LLC v. AOL, LLC et al
28. Soilworks LLC v Midwest Industrial Supply Inc
29. Priest et al v Google Inc.
30. 21 srl v. Apple Inc. et al
31. PACid Group, LLC v. Apple Inc. et al
32. Accolade Systems LLC v. Micron Technology Inc et al
33. Affinity Labs of Texas, LLC v. Apple, Inc.
34. Clear With Computers, LLC v. Bassett Furniture Industries, Inc. et al
35. Motorola Inc v. Research In Motion Limited et al

Posted in Power of Patent. Tags: Apple, bankruptcy, chapter 11, economy downturn, facebook, Google, innovation, intellectual property, IP innovation, Jobs, Lawfirm, microsoft, North America, patent, patent attorney, patent infringement, Patent invalidation, Patent lawsuits, recession, revenue generation, USPTO.

Tweet  Delicious  Digg  Facebook 

Applied Nanoscience Inc. announced in a press release that it has received formal notification for the issuance of a patent in Singapore for its core technology platform encompassing “Filtering Devices Incorporating Nanoparticles.”

The company has already been issued this similarly broad patent in Taiwan. The patent covers three main ways of associating the nanoparticles with filter media: (1) having pellets of nanoparticles located adjacent to the filter media, (2) coating the filter media with a powder of nanoparticles, and (3) impregnating the nanoparticles into the filter media.

In addition, ANI has received formal communication that the issuance of this same patent is imminent in Russia along with written confirmation that the granting of a patent based upon a divisional application is expected soon in India.

The company has received very positive notification relating to the patent application on their proprietary nanoparticle formulation from the USPTO.

Applied Nanoscience Inc. is a marketer and developer of innovative, high-performance filtration systems and technologies to customers worldwide in a focused effort to provide a safer tomorrow.

Tweet  Delicious  Digg  Facebook 

USPTO has awarded Signalife, Inc. a new and important patent entitled “System For, And Method Of, Monitoring Heartbeats Of A Patient”. The patent, which covers 37 claims, will enhance the Company’s ability to develop new proprietary products.

Tweet  Delicious  Digg  Facebook 

Medical Corporation, a medical products company developing and marketing devices to improve cardiac performance through Aortic Flow Therapy, announced today that the USPTO has issued U.S. Patent number 7,331,921 (the ‘921 patent) entitled “Implantable Heart Assist System and Method of Applying Same.” The ‘921 patent which discloses and claims methods and apparatus for intravascular renal (kidney) perfusion is exclusively owned by Orqis and is the Company’s 15th U.S. Patent.

Patent #: US7331921
Title: Implantable heart assist system and method of applying same
Abstract: An extracardiac pumping for supplementing the circulation of blood, including the cardiac output, in a patient without any component thereof being connected to the patient’s heart, and methods of using same. One embodiment of the intravascular extracardiac system comprises a pump with inflow and outflow conduits that are sized and configured to be implantable intravascularly through a non-primary vessel, whereby it may positioned where desired within the patient’s vasculature. The system comprises a subcardiac pump that may be driven directly or electromagnetically from within or without the patient. The pump is configured to be operated continuously or in a pulsatile fashion, synchronous with the patient’s heart, thereby potentially reducing the afterload of the heart. In another embodiment, the system is positioned extracorporeally, with the inflow conduit and outflow conduit applied percutaneously to a non-primary vessel for circulating blood to and from the non-primary vessel or between the non-primary vessel and another blood vessel within the patient’s vasculature.
Assignee: Orqis Medical Corporation
Filed: June 28, 2004
Issued: February 19, 2008

Tweet  Delicious  Digg  Facebook