Patent Baristas » Cool Tools

Best Twitter Feeds for Pharma News

Stephen Jenei — Tue, 18 May 2010 18:27:53 +0000

The Pharmacy Technician Certification blog posted its round-up of the 50 Best Twitter Feeds for Pharma News. While there is no shortage of feeds you can find in pharma, this list provides a breakdown of the best feeds in various categories.

Best Pro Twitter Feeds for Pharma News include:

Pharma Twits

Café Pharma

Fierce Pharma

Best Individual Twitter Feeds for Pharma News include

Pharma Guy

Pharma Expert

Sarah Morgan

Best Science Twitter Feeds for Pharma News include:

Pharma Biotech

Fierce Biotech

Center Watch

Best Company Twitter Feeds for Pharma News include:

Pfizer News

Novartis

Amgen

Let us know if there are any feeds you prefer!

SyncIDS Helps with IDS Filings

Stephen Jenei — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 21:17:37 +0000

I received information from SyncIDS on their new, on-line service that provides patent practitioners with a prior art database for filing Information Disclosure Statements with the U.S. Patent Office. When new documents or matters are added to the database, SyncIDS automatically shows all of IDSs that need to be filed, and everything needed to file each IDS is automatically placed in a separate folder including a completed 1449 form and any non-U.S. PDFs

In a quick review of the site, it seems like the system is not totally ready for prime time with some broken links and incomplete information. For now, SyncIDS is divided in to four sections. (1) The IDS section automatically generates IDSs that need to be filed. (2) The client section allows you to view and modify information for each client such as the default filer and prior art categories for that client. (3) The matter section allows you to view and modify information for each matter such as the first inventor‟s name and any related matters. (4) The document section includes all of the prior art for a matter.

From SyncIDS:

In a nutshell, SyncIDS is a web based prior art database. There is nothing to install. All of the software and data is hosted and backed up by SyncIDS. When new documents or matters are added to the database, SyncIDS automatically shows all of the IDSs that need to be filed, and everything needed to file each IDS is automatically placed in a separate folder including a completed 1449 form and any non-U.S. PDFs. It reduces the time it takes to prepare an IDS and greatly reduces the chance for errors.

For example, let’s say you get an Office Action in matter 100. Simply open matter 100 in SyncIDS, enter those documents, and check them off as already cited for that matter. If there are U.S. patents or publications, you don’t even need to enter the issue/publication date or first inventor’s name. SyncIDS will do that for you. Assuming you have previously told SyncIDS what matters are related to each other (or you have categorized your matters and references by subject matter), SyncIDS will instantly generate an IDS for every other matter that needs one. You don’t even need to open up those other matters. No manually checking files or filling out forms.

If you’ve used SyncIDS, place your thoughts in the comments section below.

A copy of the user’s manual is here.

There Be Feeds In That Patent Office

Stephen Jenei — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 17:53:41 +0000

The U.S. Patent Office has learned of a new technological advance called “rss feed” and has instituted the system for the USPTO Systems Status and Availability site a mere 10 years after Netscape started using it.

On the Electronic Business Center, you can check the web page for the latest information on operating status and availability of Online Business Systems. However, subscribing to the available feeds will be much easier and more immediate.

For Standard Hours of Availability for Online Business Systems, System Descriptions, and Operating Requirements/Compatibilities, see the links here:

Also, don’t forget the Director’s Forum: David Kappos’ Public Blog. [No word on David Kappos' Secret Blog] The site, ostensibly by Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the USPTO David Kappos, features fairly frequent updates of the goings-on at the Patent Office. This blog, while it can’t be completely open, is a good way for the public to dialog on patent issues.

In a post on the Supreme Court’s April 2007 decision in KSR v. Teleflex regarding obviousness, Kappos details how the Office’s first step toward addressing the implications of the KSR decision was to publish examination guidelines – available at http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/sol/notices/72fr57526.pdf – for its personnel to follow when determining obviousness. In accordance with the Supreme Court’s instructions regarding flexibility, the guidelines recognized that an examiner’s approach to obviousness had been broadened beyond the strict teaching-suggestion-motivation test. At the same time, they also stressed that in order to arrive at a proper conclusion of obviousness, examiners still needed to couple sound reasoning with particular findings of fact.

Some have suggested that the Office is determining obviousness in a way that stifles innovation by refusing patents for truly inventive subject matter. Practitioners asked the PTO to provide examples of non-obvious claims in view of KSR to serve as a complement to the examples of obvious claims already in the guidelines. He indicated that now that a body of case law has been decided in light of the KSR decision, they are able to undertake that task.

Quanta Podcast: Patent Rights in the Supreme Court

Stephen Jenei — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 15:49:06 +0000

The Federalist Society has a new patent law podcast posted on the Quanta Computer v. LG Electronics case before the Supreme Court and its impact on patent licensing. In Quanta, the Supreme Court is being asked whether the Federal Circuit erred by holding, in conflict with decisions of this Court and other courts of appeals, that respondent’s patent rights were not exhausted by its license agreement with Intel Corporation, and Intel’s subsequent sale of product under the license to petitioners.

Quanta: Patent Rights in the Supreme Court 9-30-09 - MP3
Running Time: 01:40:52

To listen, please right click on the audio file you wish to hear and then select “Save Link As…” or “Save Target As…” After their opening remarks, the panelists engage in a vigorous exchange of ideas about exhaustion doctrine and patent licensing.

In the case, LG Electronics owned a patent for a microprocessor chip, which it licensed to Intel, but excluded from the licensing agreement any Intel customer that used the chip with non-Intel products. One third-party purchaser integrated the chip with Dell, HP and Gateway products.

In this U.S. Supreme Court case, the Court was asked whether a patent holder can seek royalties from the downstream third-party purchaser. The Court concluded unanimously that it could not. Writing for the Court, Justice Clarence Thomas relied on the theory of “patent exhaustion,” which provides that a patented item’s initial authorized sale terminates all patent rights to that item, denying LGE royalties from companies down the line of commerce. The panel of experts discuss the decision, and the implications of the decision for patent law and licensing agreements.

Featuring:

Prof. Richard A. Epstein, University of Chicago Law School
Prof. Scott Kieff, The George Washington University Law School
Prof. Mark Lemley, Stanford University Law School
Mr. Fred von Lohmann, Electronic Frontier Foundation
Moderator: Prof. Adam Mossoff, George Mason University School of Law

Gettin’ Xyggy Wit Patents

Stephen Jenei — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 15:30:49 +0000

Dinesh Vadhia, CEO of Xyggy Corporation, gave us an early look at a new patent search tool Xyggy Patent, which allows you to search for similar patents using known patents as the query.

The queried patents are selected by patent number or patent title and the results are returned in ranked order according to their relevance to the referenced patent.

“Our paradigm for search is based on the fundamental idea that search should be item-based not just text-based, and that a query based on items provides substantial advantages and additional information as compared to queries involving only keywords.” ~Xyggy Patent

As an example, we did a search for the Bayer patent for drospirenone (U.S. Pat. No. 6,787,531). The search box has an auto-complete function so entering “6787531″ brings up the patent but entering just the title “Pharmaceutical composition for use as a contraceptive” also brought up the correct patent.

In a comparison, a search of Google Patents brought up the ’531 patent and just three related patents, ranked according to popularity where Xyggy Patent found 19 pages of patents and ranked them based upon how similar they are to the Bayer patent.

The search results are presented as titles only but a mouse over brings up a pop-up box with various pertinent details like the title and a portion of the abstract.

The coverage for Xyggy Patent is US patents from 1976 to end-June ’09 and they’ll begin regular updates in September. It is clearly still in the early stages and mentions expanding to further types of searches including dating services and biotechnology sequences. Whether those two things should ever come from the same entity we’ll leave for another day.

Disclaimer: No offense meant to Will Smith.