1. PATENT LAW TRENDS (walking around patent knowledge)
Chris regan 5/24/17

2. Us – Weak or strong patent system?
Actors: PTO, Congress, Courts, large users…, patent bar
Goal: Encourage innovation, by giving predictable return on investment
What is required of patent system:
Ability to obtain patent (time, cost, scope)
Certainty of ability to enforce (validity, further PTO challenges)
Ability to enforce patent (time, cost, remedies) through litigation
No injunction – efficient infringement; Attorney fees; Enhanced damages
Weak/Strong U.S. patent system competes with other countries
Where are we now? What’s the direction?

3. Uspto BOLO CES

4. Uspto REPORTS

5. Uspto 2016

6. Uspto 2016

7. Uspto 2006

8. Uspto numbers 2016

9. Uspto numbers from 2006
Note the number of Examiners

10. Uspto LOCATIONS 2016

11. Uspto new PRACTIONER numbers

12. Uspto GRANT numbers

13. Uspto numbers

14. Uspto numbers all patents granted 1977 to 2015

15. Uspto numbers all patents granted 1977 to 2015

16. Uspto numbers

17. Uspto numbers

18. Uspto numbers

19. Uspto numbers

20. Uspto PENDENCY numbers

21. Uspto INTERNAL COST numbers

22. Uspto appeal numbers

23. Uspto patent owner numbers (cnet news 1/9/17)

24. tech companies

25. tech companies

26. tech companies

27. tech companies

28. tech companies

29. Uspto biggest patent owner says:

30. Uspto biggest patent owner says:

31. Numbers (unified patents 2016)

32. Numbers (unified patents 2016)

33. Numbers (unified patents 2016)

34. Numbers (unified patents 2016)

35. Numbers (unified patents 2016)

36. Numbers (unified patents 2016)

37. Numbers (unified patents 2016)

38. Numbers (unified patents 2016)

39. Numbers (unified patents 2016)

40. Numbers (unified patents 2016)

41. Numbers (unified patents 2016)

42. Numbers (rpx 2016)

43. Ptab results

44. Ptab results

45. Ptab results

46. Ptab results

47. Numbers (rpx 2016)

48. Numbers (rpx 2016)

49. Numbers (wipo 2015)

50. Numbers (wipo 2015)

51. Numbers (wipo 2015)

52. Numbers (wipo 2015)

53. Numbers (EPO)

54. Numbers (EPO)

55. Numbers (EPO)

56. Numbers (EPO)

57. Alice – 101 Fenwick & West tally:
Decisions upholding claims:
PTAB 33
Fed Cir 5
D Ct 42
Decisions invalidating claims:
PTAB 309
Fed Cir 27
D Ct 129

58. 101

59. 101

60. 101 proposals

61. Cases

62. Cases

63. Cases

64. Cases

65. Cases

66. Cases

67. Cases

68. Cases

69. Cases – ongoing royalties
Artic Cat v. Bombardier – the Court should "take into account the change in the parties' bargaining positions, and the resulting change in economic circumstances, resulting from the determination of liability."
The Court has already established that the jury's reasonable rate for past damages sets the floor for the determination of an ongoing royalty rate. Therefore, the ultimate rate set by the Court will necessarily be equal to, or exceed the rate for past damages. Arctic Cat argues for an enhanced rate twice the amount of $ determined by the jury, or $ BRP maintains that the jury rate should not be increased. The Court's analysis begins with a consideration of the applicable Georgia-Pacific .
See also Paice v. Toyota and Adamo v. Microsoft

70. Questions? Is the US Patent system weak or strong?
Encourage investment?
Relative to other countries?
Which direction is the US Patent system headed?
What can be done to make it stronger?
Modify or eliminate PTAB?
Change procedures? Easier amendments? Phillips claim construction? Presumption of validity?
Return injunction as remedy?

71. end