Janices Tweets
January 4th, 2016

Janice Mueller 17 mins ago

@AMorrisReports Wow, it appears the order is having its intended effect!

Janice Mueller 21 mins ago

RIP Dr. Raymond Damadian. The appellate court that in 1997 confirmed Damadian's victory in a #patent infringement suit against #GeneralElectric is the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (#FedCir), not the Second Circuit. See caselaw.findlaw.com/us-federal-cir… twitter.com/nytimes/status…

Janice Mueller 3 hours ago

@RichSandomir your 8/27/22 #NYTimes obituary of Dr Raymond Damadian incorrectly states that US Ct App *2d* Cir decided his 1997 appellate win in Fonar Corp v GE. Rather, it was US Ct App *Federal* Circuit (#FedCir). See 107 F.3d 1543 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (Lourie, J.).

test Twitter Media - @RichSandomir your 8/27/22 #NYTimes obituary of Dr Raymond Damadian incorrectly states that US Ct App *2d* Cir decided his 1997 appellate win in Fonar Corp v GE. Rather, it was US Ct App *Federal* Circuit (#FedCir). See 107 F.3d 1543 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (Lourie, J.). https://t.co/8J0o7peEnS
Janice Mueller 23 hours ago

Click-to-Call v Ingenio 8/17 #FedCir holds Ing is 315(e)(2) IPR estopped to challenge C’s claim 17 in DCt. SCt decided SAS during proceeding. Ing chose not to seek remand to challenge claim 17 on non-instituted grounds. IPR estoppel is not same as common law collateral estoppel.

Janice Mueller 2 days ago

Reyna J concurs in judgment (no mandamus). PTO has not "nailed shut" window for filing Requests for Director Rehearing; only "closed for the moment." And Director sua sponte granted review of 2 institution denials. Extraordinary relief not req'd in this "run-of-the-mill action."

Janice Mueller 2 days ago

In re PaloAltoNetworks 8/16 #FedCir denies PAN's mandamus petition. #PTO policy of not accepting requests for Director review of *institution* decisions does NOT violate Appointments Clause. Delegation to PTAB not problematic; Director still has review authority even if un-used.

Janice Mueller 3 days ago

Kamstrup v Axioma 8/12 #FedCir affirms IPR decision that K’s claims to flowmeter housing are unpatentable per s102 or 103. No error in construing several claim terms. “Cast in one piece” is product-by-process; no patentable weight. 103 refs are analogous; same field of endeavor.

Janice Mueller 6 days ago

Like issued claim 1, assigned claim 31 is not limited to moisture-permeable devices; also covers impermeable. Circuit relies on plain language of claim 31, its comprising transition, & claim differentiation principle. Don’t limit claim 31 to a merely “preferable” characteristic.

test Twitter Media - Like issued claim 1, assigned claim 31 is not limited to moisture-permeable devices; also covers impermeable. Circuit relies on plain language of claim 31, its comprising transition, & claim differentiation principle. Don’t limit claim 31 to a merely “preferable” characteristic. https://t.co/xm9K1EEvWr
Janice Mueller 6 days ago

Hologic v Minerva 8/11 #FedCir on SCt remand affirms that M (assignor’s co) is estopped to challenge validity of H’s patent claim 1. M assigned application claim 31 & warranted its validity (tho M cancelled claim 31 w/o prej irt restriction reqt). Claim 1 not materially broader.

Janice Mueller 7 days ago

LSI v UMN 8/11 #FedCir affirms IPR determination that U’s claims to data error rate method were NOT anticipated by Tsang published application. Tsang is not s102(e) “by another” prior art bcz Tsang did not invent the relied-on portions; he merely “summarized” UMn’s earlier work.

Janice Mueller 1 week ago

In re McDonald 8/10 #FedCir affirms PTO rejection of M’s proposed reissue claims (deleting “processor”). Recapture rule bars “Trojan horse” attempt to regain scope intentionally surrendered to overcome s101 eligibility rejection of original claims. Reissue declaration defective.

Janice Mueller 2 weeks ago

Thaler v Vidal 8/5/22 #FedCir confirms that an inventor on a patent app must be a human being; AI systems are not humans. Statutory construction issue: plain meaning: Patent Act unambiguously answers question. See 35 USC s100(f) (AIA) (defining inventor as “individual”); s115.

Janice Mueller 2 weeks ago

Thaler v Vidal 8/5/22 #FedCir (Stark J) affirms EDVa: an “inventor” under the Patent Act must be a natural person; i.e. a human being. An artificial intelligence (#AI) system cannot be listed as the inventor on a #patent application.

Janice Mueller 2 weeks ago

@RobTricchinelli The fact that I understand this scares me.

Janice Mueller 3 weeks ago

Just finished @jchartstone’s new legal thriller, “The Local.” When the mercurial CEO of his SiliconValley client is charged with murdering a beloved federal judge, #patent litigator James Euchre is tapped to lead his defense in the Marshall, TX criminal trial. Highly recommended!

test Twitter Media - Just finished @jchartstone’s new legal thriller, “The Local.” When the mercurial CEO of his SiliconValley client is charged with murdering a beloved federal judge, #patent litigator James Euchre is tapped to lead his defense in the Marshall, TX criminal trial. Highly recommended! https://t.co/i9bGvl7dM0
Janice Mueller 3 weeks ago

@nytimes @jsf @BohdanSinchenko Thank you to @GarthNewelMusic for bringing this important and timely work to US audiences. “Exsistentia” won the quartet’s 2022 International Composition Competition, one of 100 entries.

Janice Mueller 3 weeks ago

@nytimes @jsf Thank you for this important essay. Yesterday a Virginia chamber music quartet premiered “Exsistentia,” by Ukrainian artist @BohdanSinchenko. The composer spoke to the audience by video from his home in the Ukraine about his haunting, evocative work. youtu.be/YjqdLcG1-O8

Janice Mueller 3 weeks ago

Realtime v Netflix 7/27 #FedCir 2-1 affirms atty fee award to N in CD Cal. action under ct’s inherent equitable power. R “blatantly” gamed/forum-shopped its “tanking” case after Del. magistrate held same pats ineligibile & PTO instituted IPRs. Bad faith. Reyna J: award more fees.

Contact Chisum Patent Academy

Chisum Patent Academy, Inc.
951 Delong Road
Lexington, KY 40515

Email: info@chisum.com

Phone: (855) DCHISUM or (855) 324-4786

Specific needs?

We custom design seminars to meet individual client specifications. Please contact us today for more information.

©2014 Chisum Patent Academy - All Rights Reserved

Chisum Patent Academy, Inc. 951 Delong Road, Lexington, KY 40515 | (855) - DCHISUM or (855) 324-4786 | info@chisum.com

Website design by Bluegrass Internet Services