Implementing New U.S. Patent Rules: Helpful Resources for Individuals, Corporations, and Universities
Changes in U.S. patent rules since September 2011, when the American Invents Act (AIA) was enacted, have altered patent application preparation, prosecution, and enforcement strategy. For many, however, the most sweeping patent law change is just around the corner, when the AIA's first-inventor-to-file system becomes effective on March 16. Individuals, corporations, and universities looking for resources and information about first-to-file and other significant changes brought about by the AIA, and how to plan for them, may find the following articles helpful.
.png)
More than 150 intellectual property lawsuits were filed in Maryland's federal district court in 2012, a 45% increase over 2011 levels, 75% ahead of 2010. If the individual number of actual plaintiffs and nominal counterclaim plaintiffs in cases with multiple parties are counted, 2012 will be remembered as a very litigious year for patent, trademark, and copyright owners. Nationally, the number of new IP lawsuits may have increased as much as 30%, according to some sources..jpg)
In Bouchat v. NFL et al., the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland considered Defendants' respective motions for summary judgment based upon their copyright fair use defenses (17 U.S.C. Sec. 107). In doing so, the Court granted Defendants NFL Enterprises LLC's and Baltimore Ravens L.P.'s motions, but denied Defendant Electronic Arts' (EA Arts) and NFL Properties LLC's motions. On December 21, 2012, Judge Garbis referred the EA matter to Magistrate Judge Gesner for possible settlement/ADR resolution..jpg)
Keeping Secrets – A Practical Introduction to Trade Secret Law and Strategy, by Darin W. Synder and David S. Almeling, Oxford University Press, 2012
In a highly anticipated decision from the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals involving .png)
The number and percentage of appealable issues reversed by the U.S. Courts of Appeals may suggest many things, including how well U.S. District Court judges are doing adjudicating those issues. In patent cases, reversal rates for claim construction issues have been well documented (.jpg)
.jpg)
Several states, including Maryland, recognize a person’s exclusive right to control the use of his or her name or likeness as a common law right of privacy. A person who believes his or her name or likeness has been appropriated by another for commercial gain without the person's consent may bring an action to seek remedies.
If applications submitted to the .gif){kind=small}
.png)
More than 5,200 U.S. patents were subject to at least one Secrecy Order by the end of fiscal year 2011, government statistics obtained through the Freedom of Information Act reveal (source: FAS.org). The U.S. Patent & Trademark Office issues Secrecy Orders upon recommendation by various U.S. governmental departments, part of its implementation of the Patent Secrecy Act, 35 U.S.C. Sec. 181 et seq..png)
This article was principally authored by Jay Lessler, Esq., of Blank Rome LLP.png)
.jpg)
In Pulse Medical Instruments, Inc., v. Drug Impairment Detection Services, LLC, the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland (J. Chasanow) denied each party's separate motion to exclude the other party's expert's testimony. In doing so, the Court found the following types of evidence to be admissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 702:
In IA Labs v. Nintendo, the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland 
