基本説明
A review and analysis of all relevant case law and guidelines presented by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO).
Full Description
In its 2010 decision in Bilski v. Kappos, the U.S. Supreme Court redefined patentable subject matter for business methods and computer software, but did so without imposing definitive tests and definitions, effectively leaving such guidance for future court decisions and the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). As a result, the law is essentially being written at present, and will continue to be written and narrowed over the next decade. Business Method and Software Patents addresses the drafting of business-method and software patents in the wake of Bilski v. Kappos. Morgan Rosenberg and Richard Apley offer a review and analysis of all relevant case law and guidelines presented by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). With the use of actual patents filed by the authors, this work provides practical information and guidance on the drafting of successful patent applications.
Contents
FOREWORD BY RICHARD J. APLEY; INTRODUCTION; CHAPTER ONE: BUSINESS METHODS: AN OVERVIEW; THE SUPREME COURT TRILOGY; BILSKI V. KAPPOS; BACKGROUND OF BILSKI; THE CAFC DECISION; CONCLUSION; CHAPTER TWO: PATENT OFFICE GUIDELINES AND THE POST-BILSKI JUDICIAL AFTERMATH; POST-BILSKI CASELAW; USPTO GUIDELINES; LATEST APPLICATION OF BILSKI; CHAPTER THREE: EXAMPLES OF BUSINESS METHOD CLAIMS; EXAMPLE 1: PATENT NO. 7,644,007; EXAMPLE 2: PATENT NO. 7,253,627; EXAMPLE 3: PUBLISHED PATENT APPLICATION NO. 2010/0312654; CHAPTER FOUR: ANALYSIS OF THE THREE EXAMPLES; EXAMPLE 1: PATENT NO. 7,644,007; EXAMPLE 2: PATENT NO. 7,253,627; EXAMPLE 3: PUBLISHED PATENT APPLICATION NO. 2010/0312654; CHAPTER FIVE: ALGORITHMS AND PURE SOFTWARE APPLICATIONS; EXAMPLE 4: PUBLISHED PATENT APPLICATION NO. 2010/0322422; CHAPTER SIX: DRAFTING THE SPECIFICATION; THE DETAILED DESCRIPTION AND THE DRAWINGS; THE BACKGROUND; THE SUMMARY; CHAPTER SEVEN: OTHER METHODS; SURGICAL METHODS; TREATMENT METHODS; GAMES; TEACHING METHODS; MISCELLANEOUS METHODS; APPENDIX A: THE FIRST (SURVIVING) BUSINESS METHOD PATENT; APPENDIX B: USPTO GUIDELINES FOR BUSINESS METHODS (JULY 27, 2010); APPENDIX C: BILSKI V. KAPPOS, 130 S.CT. 3218 (2010); APPENDIX D: U.S. PATENT NO. 7,644,007; APPENDIX E: U.S. PATENT NO. 7,253,627; APPENDIX F: U.S. PUBLISHED PATENT APPLICATION NO. 2010/0312654 PG. 270; APPENDIX G: U.S. PUBLISHED PATENT APPLICATION NO. 2010/0322422; APPENDIX H: USPTO INTERIM EXAMINATION INSTRUCTIONS (AUGUST 24, 2009) PG. 296; APPENDIX I: USPTO INTERIM BUSINESS METHOD TRAINING MATERIAL (AUGUST, 2009); APPENDIX J: SURGICAL METHODS; U.S. PATENT NO. 7,127,295; U.S. PATENT NO. 7,399,826; U.S. PUBLISHED PATENT APPLICATION NO. 2011/0045438; APPENDIX K: TREATMENT METHODS; U.S. PATENT NO. 7,288,077; U.S. PATENT NO. 7,594,511; U.S. PATENT NO. 7,895,057; APPENDIX L: GAMES; U.S. PATENT NO. 6,419,230; U.S. PATENT NO. 7,431,298; U.S. PATENT NO. 7,665,733; APPENDIX M: TEACHING METHODS; U.S. PATENT NO. 6,863,533; U.S. PUBLISHED PATENT APPLICATION NO. 2011/0044135; APPENDIX N: MISCELLANEOUS METHODS; U.S. PATENT NO. 7,908,181; U.S. PATENT NO. 7,939,466; APPENDIX O: BASIC PATENT APPLICATION DRAFTING TIPS; TITLE; PRIORITY CLAIMS; FIELD OF THE INVENTION; DESCRIPTION OF THE RELATED ART; SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION; BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS; DRAWINGS; DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS; ABSTRACT; CLAIMS; CLAIM STRUCTURE; INTRODUCTION; EXAMPLE; THE CLASS AND PREAMBLE; TRANSITIONAL PHRASES; THE CLAIM BODY; THE PURPOSE CLAUSE; ESSENTIAL FORM; CLAIM FUNDAMENTALS; SINGLE STATUTORY CLASSIFICATION; COMPLETENESS; DEFINITENESS; DEPENDENT CLAIMS; APPENDIX P: CHECKLISTS; APPENDIX Q: BUSINESS METHODS PARTNERSHIP MEETING (JULY 21, 2011); A. 35 USC 101 - PRACTICAL TIPS; B. UPDATE ON BUSINESS METHOD PATENTS AND BEST PRACTICES TO STREAMLINE; EXAMINATION; TABLE OF CASES; INDEX
