Selecting the Right Search Provider: Distinguishing the Experts from the Novices

The prior art search challenge – 2 When going through the process of finding a high quality prior art search provider, you typically start by looking for a provider with experienced searchers that possess technical and academic credentials in the technologies that you are prosecuting or litigating. You look for technical expertise, access to an array of databases, good quality control processes, etc. (Please refer to our previous article on how to select the right prior art search professional here.) What other attributes make a great search provider? An important factor that is often overlooked and one which can be

Continue reading »

How do I select the right prior-art search professional?

  Key questions to ask while hiring a professional/firm to perform prior-art searches. A patentability search and analysis are carried out to ensure that an invention would meet the novelty and non-obviousness requirements for obtaining a patent. However, such search and analysis would not be effective unless claimable subject matter is identified correctly. A patent agent or attorney needs to thereafter determine the breadth of the claimable matter by examining the disclosure along with the prior art identified in the search in order to complete the analysis. A patent cannot claim something that already exists or is apparent on combining

Continue reading »

Do Semantic “Similarity” Searches Produce Better and Faster Results?

The Prior Art Search Challenge It is difficult to identify novelty of an invention without a thorough understanding of previous work in the field. Prior art search is essential to define the boundaries between a potential invention as claimable in a patent and the published prior art. It is common practice to perform keyword-based and/or classification-based searches of the disclosed concept. Getting a comprehensive result including hidden or unexpected prior art using classic methods is challenging, particularly when working under time constraints. The quality of the search greatly depends on how much time is spent on the search, and on

Continue reading »

MaxVal’s Litigation Databank to supplement Aistemos’ IP Analytics Platform, Cipher

MaxVal Group, Inc. is pleased to announce its latest partnership with Aistemos, Europe’s leading IP analytics company, for its patent litigation data. US-based MaxVal has licensed its curated patent litigation data and the databank application programming interface (API) for integration into Aistemos’ global IP intelligence platform, Cipher.

Continue reading »

Deploy Patent Prosecution Analytics to Accelerate the Product Development Cycle: A Comparative Case Study

Patent prosecution analytics can provide valuable insight into the performance of an organization’s IP operations just as other forms of analytics help in reducing cost, in making better decisions and in creating new products and services. Technology companies who are actively filing patents can achieve cost savings and faster times to grant through prosecution analytics. I will illustrate what I mean by looking at two leading technology companies with different prosecution performance – Cisco and Juniper Network. The patent prosecution analytics can illustrate areas for improvement, how a company compares with direct and indirect competitors, patent prosecution trends, and areas

Continue reading »

Patent Renewal Rates under Different Renewal Period Schemes

by Bharath Venkat In order to keep a US patent in force, the US Patent & Trademark Office requires that patent owners make maintenance fees at years 3.5, 7.5 and 11.5 after grant. This is in addition to filing, search, examination and post-filing fees. Other patent issuing authorities use different rules. For the European Patent Office (EPO), maintenance payments must be made annually and cannot be pre-paid. For Japan (JPO) and the Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO), fees are due annually and can be prepaid. If the patent owner decides not to pay the maintenance fee, then the patent owner

Continue reading »

IP Managers – Don’t Expose Your Company to IP Management Risk

Intellectual Property Management can be exciting and rewarding but can also be very unforgiving if you don’t do it right. There are some mistakes that can be extremely costly, but are, unfortunately, easy for an IP Manager to make. These mistakes can cause your company to lose its IP rights and can result in competitors getting those rights.

Continue reading »

The New Game Changer – IP5 and Global Prosecution Data

It has been over fifteen years since the release of Private PAIR. It was one of the most significant technical achievements by the USPTO and one of the major milestones in the patent data revolution by allowing electronic patent filing and data access. Although a real game changer fifteen years ago, as anyone who tried to get through the latest Java updates to access Private PAIR (especially on a browser other than FireFox) can attest, Private PAIR is far from cutting edge in 2016. Make no mistake; PAIR is still the bread and butter for US patent practice operations and

Continue reading »