Clause 8 Season 3, Episode 6: Ray Millien, a Renaissance Man of IP

Eli Mazour‘s Clause 8 Podcast, The Voice of IP, has returned for Season 3, featuring all new exclusive interviews with the intellectual property community’s biggest names.

LISTEN TO EPISODE 6 HERE!

 


 

Raymond Millien likes to compare himself to Forrest Gump. 

As someone who pivoted from a programming job at GE Aerospace to a career in intellectual property law, bounced between inside and outside counsel roles within that space, and even briefly dabbled in public policy, he’s definitely a renaissance man. And he’s fallen into many of those jobs by accident.

He credits his adventurous and successful career — working as Chief IP Counsel for big-name companies like Volvo, founding his own IP boutique, and now serving as the CEO of Harness IP — to intellectual curiosity and openness. 

Appreciating every aspect of the game, Millien says, means you’ll play smarter.

“I never want to take one camp or the other because your client may be a patent troll today, it may be an operating company tomorrow. And all of them are necessary in the ecosystem,” he says.

On this episode of Clause 8, Millien sits down with us to tell all about what it means to have a “renaissance” career in IP law and what it takes to be an inside IP lawyer for major corporations. He even reveals some industry secrets about startup patents along the way.

You can subscribe and listen to the full episode on your favorite podcasting app and learn more at voiceofIP.com. New episodes will drop every Tuesday!

 

Clause 8 Season 3, Episode 5: Professor Tim Hsieh Explains the Benefits of Judge Shopping

Eli Mazour‘s Clause 8 Podcast, The Voice of IP, has returned for Season 3, featuring all new exclusive interviews with the intellectual property community’s biggest names.

LISTEN TO EPISODE 5 HERE!

 


Clause 8 - Professor Tim Hsieh

The 2017 TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Supreme Court decision led to a major shift in where patent litigation cases are filed in the United States. Before TC Heartland, a patent owner could bring a case in almost any district where an alleged infringer conducted business. Because of its predictable rules and streamlined procedures, the Eastern District of Texas became the most popular forum for such cases; nearly 40% of patent infringement actions were filed there in 2016.

When Professor Timothy Hsieh clerked in the Eastern District of Texas, he saw firsthand the benefits – for patent owners and defendants – of experienced judges handling patent cases. TC Heartland changed that by changing the rules regarding where companies can be sued for patent infringement. By 2017, only 15% of patent infringement cases were tried in the Eastern District of Texas. Instead, patent cases became concentrated in Delaware and California.

“If you’re not solving that forum shopping issue and you’re just changing the forum, then you might have a new problem that’s created […] wherever you shift the cases to,” Hsieh says.

But Hsieh’s key point is that forum shopping — or even judge shopping — is not a problem at all. In fact, it’s a good thing. “If anything, the defense are also getting a much fairer, much more balanced adjudication because you have someone who’s very knowledgeable about patent law,” Hsieh says.

Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) seemed to recognize these benefits of district court judges who have relevant patent expertise and experience when he included the Patent Pilot Program in the Leahy-Smith American Invents Act. The program allowed federal district court judges in select districts to volunteer to handle patent cases. The goal was for certain judges to have increased expertise – and as a result – do a better job.

However, after the program expired and Judge Alan Albright started attracting patent cases to his Waco court room in the Western District of Texas, Leahy had a change of heart. In an unprecedented letter to Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, Leahy pressured Roberts to do what he could to stop Waco from being a go-to patent venue by suggesting there was something untoward about Albright’s interest in patent cases. The pressure campaign seems to have worked. In his end-of-year report, Roberts highlighted the issue and stressed “the role of district judges as generalists.”

Since Hsieh has become known as an expert on the subject of patent venues, I knew he was the perfect person to talk to about this recent controversy.

I also spoke with Professor Hsieh about whether how courts think about venue is outdated and his fascinating career trajectory of patent litigator turned patent examiner turned law school professor.

You can subscribe and listen to the full episode on your favorite podcasting app and learn more at voiceofIP.com. New episodes will drop every Tuesday!

 

Clause 8 Season 3, Episode 4: Phil Warrick on Working with Senator Coons to Fix the Section 101 Mess

Eli Mazour‘s Clause 8 Podcast, The Voice of IP, has returned for Season 3, featuring all new exclusive interviews with the intellectual property community’s biggest names.

LISTEN TO EPISODE 3 HERE!

 


Clause 8 - Warrick

Before Phil Warrick began working for Senator Chris Coons (D-Del.), Capitol Hill wasn’t in his career plans.

But when an opportunity to work with Coons emerged, he decided to take the leap. For two years, he served as the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (USPTO’s) IP counsel detailee to Coons after Coons helped to restart the Senate’s IP Subcommittee, working on bipartisan initiatives like the IDEA Act and legislation to fix the Section 101 patent eligibility mess. Those efforts were a dramatic departure from Congress’s previous fixation on the “patent troll” narrative.

“And for me, as a detailee, it was just a great opportunity to learn more about all these issues that were at play with intellectual property, and having really interesting conversations with folks on and off the hill, who said, I understand why this is your perspective, why you might have this view as a patent litigator, but let me give you this view from a completely different perspective,” Warrick says. “And it really opened my eyes.”

After Coons friend and fellow Delawarean, Joe Biden, was elected as president, the innovation community was hopeful that Coons would use his top role on the Subcommittee to prioritize patent issues within the Biden administration and Congress.

However, Democratic Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) had other ideas, and took over as the top Democrat on the Subcommittee.  Since that time, the Subcommittee has moved in a very different, arguably anti-patent direction, and Leahy’s views have won out in seemingly every major administration decision related to patents.

But in yet another twist, Leahy has announced that he is retiring and won’t seek re-election in 2022.  So, Coons is likely to return to his role as the top Democrat on the IP Subcommittee. Warrick’s insights from working for Coons are critical for anyone who wants to impact patent policy in the future.

You can subscribe and listen to the full episode on your favorite podcasting app and learn more at voiceofIP.com. New episodes will drop every Tuesday!

 

Clause 8 Season 3, Episode 3: Louis Carbonneau on Brokering Patents After the Patent Gold Rush

Eli Mazour‘s Clause 8 Podcast, The Voice of IP, has returned for Season 3, featuring all new exclusive interviews with the intellectual property community’s biggest names.

LISTEN TO EPISODE 3 HERE!

 


 

 

The golden age for patent brokers has come and gone, but that doesn’t stop Louis Carbonneau.

“There are very, very few patent brokers nowadays,” Carbonneau says. “We’re just one of a handful left. And frankly, we get about four or five portfolios every single day that people want us to broker. We only say yes 1% or 2% of the time.”

As one of the world’s leading patent brokers, the CEO and Founder of Tangible IP has brokered over 4,500 patents and boasts close to 30 years in the intellectual property industry.

With experience as Microsoft’s former General Manager of International IP & Licensing, Carbonneau has sat on many sides of the intellectual property table. He shares his adventures in the industry and lessons learned with Eli Mazour, host of the Clause 8 podcast, including behind-the-scenes stories from his time at Microsoft, the common pitfalls of patent licensing, and why price isn’t always an essential part of the conversation when buying and selling intellectual property.

“Some people will not even want to acquire patents for free if they don’t like the patents because then they have to start paying for maintenance fees and prosecution fees. It’s like a free puppy. It’s only free for a few hours, and after that, you start paying,” Carbonneau explains.

Those that are interested in selling their patents need to understand what brokers — and buyers — are looking for in a deal.

You can subscribe and listen to the full episode on your favorite podcasting app and learn more at voiceofIP.com. New episodes will drop every Tuesday!

 

Clause 8 Season 3, Episode 2: Ryan Abbott on Why Patent Law Should Recognize AI Inventors

Eli Mazour‘s Clause 8 Podcast, The Voice of IP, has returned for Season 3, featuring all new exclusive interviews with the intellectual property community’s biggest names.

LISTEN TO EPISODE 2 HERE!

 


 

 

 

Good lawyers effectively deal with the present. Very few have what it takes to create the future. Professor Ryan Abbott is doing just that.

He leads the DABUS project: the first time ever an AI machine has been named as an inventor on a patent application. Most thought that the project was an interesting academic exercise that was unlikely to go anywhere. Some – uncharitably – dismissed it as “a publicity stunt.”

Yet, the DABUS project did get a patent in South Africa. And, an Australian judge ruled that AI machine can be recognized as an inventor. Even more significantly, the DABUS project successfully raised awareness about the issue of AI inventorship among policy makers all over the world.

But what does it mean for an AI system to be named as an inventor in the real world?

In this episode, Abbott makes his case for the skeptics: Identifying AI as the inventor on patents is morally and commercially important. He also explains how to judge whether the human pushing the buttons is as much an inventor as the AI they’re programming.

On this episode, Eli and Prof. Abbott talk about the Artificial Inventor Project, whether everything will be “obvious” in the future, and Prof. Abbott’s fascinating new book “The Reasonable Robot: Artificial Intelligence and the Law.”

 

You can subscribe and listen to the full episode on your favorite podcasting app and learn more at voiceofIP.com. New episodes will drop every Tuesday!

 

Harrity Referenced in Bloomberg Article: Diversity Woes in Patent Field Lead Lawyers to Try New Ideas

Diversity Woes in Patent Field Lead Lawyers to Try New Ideas

Harrity & Harrity, LLP’s research and innovative diversity initiatives are featured in a recent Bloomberg article on diversity in the patent field.

The article references research found in Elaine Spector and LaTia Brand‘s “Diversity in Patent Law: A Data Analysis of Diversity in the Patent Practice by Technology Background and Region” piece for ABA’s Landslide Magazine, including the following excerpt:

More ‘Michaels’ Than Racially Diverse Women

Fewer than 22% of patent attorneys and agents registered with the Patent and Trademark Office are women, a 2020 study led by the Virginia patent law firm Harrity & Harrity LLP found. Patent agents aren’t attorneys but can work on inventors’ patent applications.

The average number of PTO registrants who are racial minorities has been around 6.5% over the past two decades, according to the study.

“Among racially diverse women, the numbers are significantly worse,” the authors wrote in a September 2020 article for Landslide, a magazine published by the ABA’s Section of Intellectual Property Law.

“In fact, there are more patent attorneys and agents named ‘Michael’ in the United States than there are racially diverse women,” the authors wrote.

Managing Partner Paul Harrity is also quoted in the Bloomberg article, specifically with regard to Harrity’s upcoming Patent Pathways program.

“The Harrity & Harrity law firm has plans for a ‘Patent Pathways’ program this summer. It’s a free, 42-week virtual course, with the aim to register 20 underrepresented minorities with the patent bar in the first year.

The program will target engineering and science students, or individuals in those fields looking to change careers. Paul Harrity, a founding partner at the firm, said they’re looking to connect with candidates with presentations at universities and through groups like the National Society of Black Engineers.

Harrity said he stumbled into the patent field after seeing a job advertisement for a patent examiner position at the PTO. It’s not an uncommon experience.

‘A lot of people have the same story—somebody just mentioned it to them,’ Harrity said. ‘We want to be the people to mention it.'”

You can find the full article by Bloomberg Law HERE.

About Harrity & Harrity, LLP

Harrity & Harrity is a leading patent preparation and prosecution firm specializing in the electrical and mechanical technology areas, with a focus on giving back through its Harrity 4 Charity program and many diversity initiatives. Harrity is considered a Go-To Firm for the Patent 300™ and their clients trust in their high-quality work, experienced people, industry leading innovation, and outstanding service.

For more information on Harrity’s analytics, automation, and patent services, firm culture, and current openings, please visit harrityllp.com.

Clause 8 Season 3, Episode 1: Professor Dan Brown and Dan Brown Jr.’s Patent Battle Against a Retail Giant

Eli Mazour‘s Clause 8 Podcast, The Voice of IP, has returned for Season 3, featuring all new exclusive interviews with the intellectual property community’s biggest names.

LISTEN TO EPISODE 1 HERE!

 


 

 

 

Professor Dan Brown and his son, Dan Brown Jr., are straight out of central casting.  Prof. Brown, the father, grew up in a working-class Irish family on Chicago’s South Side before eventually becoming a professor of engineering at Northwestern University. Dan Jr. is a moppy-haired marketing genius who is now President of LoggerHead Tools.

As a result of a father-son argument, Prof. Brown invented an award-winning tool called the Bionic Wrench and pursued the audacious idea of manufacturing it in entirely in America. Sears positioned itself to become their exclusive retailer when the initial order of 300,000 units sold out between Black Friday and Christmas. Unfortunately, not long after, Sears started pressuring them to manufacture it in China to lower the price of the bionic wrench.

“It was pure greed. And we said no,” Prof. Brown said.

When Prof. Brown refused, Sears got another company, Apex, to make a knockoff of the bionic wrench in China. So, LoggerHead Tools, represented by Skiermont Derby, took them to court. They were on their way to being vindicated when the death of the original federal judge, assigned to the case, put that into doubt.

Today, they continue to tell the story of their “David and Goliath” battle in hopes that the patent law can be improved to support America’s innovators.

 

You can subscribe and listen to the full episode on your favorite podcasting app and learn more at voiceofIP.com. New episodes will drop every Tuesday!

 

Harrity Names Ryan Thelen as Newest Partner

Congratulations to Harrity’s newest Partner, Ryan Thelen!

(WASHINGTON, DC)  Harrity & Harrity, LLP, a leading patent law firm based in Fairfax, VA, is pleased to announce the promotion of Ryan Thelen to the position of Partner with the firm. Harrity & Harrity operates nationwide, with 37 total patent attorneys and agents across 26 states. Ryan is Harrity’s 8th Partner and first promotion of 2022.

Ryan has been with Harrity since 2018. His practice focuses on the preparation and prosecution of patent applications in various fields, such as telecommunications, networking, software, semiconductors, cloud computing, automation, data analytics, and security. He has been instrumental in landing, onboarding, and managing one of the firm’s largest clients and is regularly involved in firm innovation and best practice implementation. Ryan is an active member of the Intellectual Property Owners Association (IPO) and PTAB Bar Association.

“It is an honor to be a part of the leadership of such an amazing firm with such a bright future. I could tell right away when I first joined Harrity that this firm was going to be very different from other firms because how amazing the support staff is and the level of training that was provided. Everyone here really cares about the success of others and the firm as a whole. I am really grateful to be given the opportunity to pay it forward and to help the firm continue to grow,” said Ryan of his new position.

Prior to joining Harrity & Harrity, Ryan practiced in-house at Panduit Corp. and Hewlett Packard Enterprise. While in-house, Ryan gained extensive experience in patent portfolio management, product clearance, invention disclosure mining, infringement analysis, and post-grant proceedings before the Patent Trial & Appeal Board. Prior to his work in-house, Ryan worked at Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett, & Dunner as well as Arent Fox while attending law school in the evenings.

Ryan received his Juris Doctor with honors from The George Washington University Law School (2016) and earned a Bachelor of Science degree in Electrical Engineering from Kettering University (2008).  Prior to starting his legal career, Ryan was a project engineer for United Technologies in the UTC Aerospace Systems business unit, where he led teams of engineers in the development of commercial and military aircraft engines.

Ryan works remotely out of Flushing, MI, where he lives with his wife and three young daughters.

 

About Harrity & Harrity, LLP

Harrity & Harrity is a leading patent preparation and prosecution firm specializing in the electrical and mechanical technology areas, with a focus on giving back through its Harrity 4 Charity program and many diversity initiatives. Harrity is considered a Go-To Firm for the Patent 300™ and their clients trust in their high-quality work, experienced people, industry leading innovation, and outstanding service.

For more information on Harrity’s analytics, automation, and patent services, firm culture, and current openings, please visit harrityllp.com.

Harrity Welcomes Four Outstanding Patent Professionals

Harrity & Harrity, LLP, a leading patent preparation and prosecution firm in the electrical and mechanical space, is excited to announce the addition of four experienced patent professionals. Over the last six months, Harrity has welcomed Jim Nuxoll, Thomas Hartin, Christopher Wen, and Christopher Dawson to the firm. With over five decades of combined experience across a variety of complex technologies, including semiconductors and 5G networks, each hire is a valuable addition to the team. “At Harrity, we handpick every single individual to join our firm. To say that we are excited to have these four superstars on our team is an understatement,” Managing Partner Paul Harrity says of the firm’s recent growth. 

Learn more about the new Harrity team members below.  

 

Jim Nuxoll | Working remotely from Idaho (Joined June 7, 2021) 

Jim Nuxoll is a registered patent agent has over twenty-five years of experience in the semiconductor industry, including having served on Micron Technology’s patent committee. He is a listed inventor on nine U.S. patents and has extensive experience in drafting and preparing patent applications covering various aspects in the field of semiconductors, as well as prosecuting patent applications in the U.S. as well as non-U.S. jurisdictions.   

Learn more about Jim Nuxoll here. 

 

Thomas Hartin | Working remotely from New York (Joined August 9, 2021) 

Thomas Hartin is a registered patent attorney and a member of the firm’s patent prosecution team with a focus on helping large technology companies build valuable, high-quality patent portfolios in an efficient manner. In this role, he develops and implements best practices for managing workflow and innovative, data-driven patent prosecution strategies for reaching favorable results at the USPTO. Thomas has 7 years of experience in the patent field, with experience in patent litigation, as well as preparing and prosecuting hundreds of patent applications related to telecommunications, computer software, consumer cable products and technologies, networking devices, data privacy, and the Internet of Things. 

Learn more about Thomas Hartin here. 

 

Christopher Wen | Working remotely from Michigan (Joined September 27, 2021) 

Chris Wen is a registered patent attorney with nearly a decade of experience whose practice includes assisting clients obtain patent rights in the U.S. and abroad.  His experience covers a variety of technologies, including various types of mechanical and electro-mechanical devices, among others. Prior to joining Harrity & Harrity, Chris was a partner at an intellectual property boutique firm in the metro-Detroit area where he worked on a wide array of patent and other intellectual property matters. 

Learn more about Chris Wen here. 

 

Christopher Dawson | Working remotely from Kansas (Joined October 11, 2021) 

Chris Dawson is a registered patent attorney with over a decade of experience in patent preparation and prosecution, intellectual property litigation, and technology transactions. He has extensive experience drafting patent applications directed to computer software, telecommunications, power generation and alternative energy, aerospace, LED and lighting, consumer electronics, and many other technologies. 

Prior to joining Harrity & Harrity, Chris was a partner in a Midwest-based intellectual property boutique firm, where he represented clients through all phases of intellectual property procurement and enforcement. 

Learn more about Chris Dawson here. 

 

Ask A Mentor: How Do I Negotiate Long-Term Flex Work?

 Ask A Mentor: How Do I Negotiate Long-Term Flex Work? 

By Elaine Spector (September 16, 2021) 

Experts answer questions on career and workplace conundrums in this Law360 Pulse guest column series. Have a question you’re afraid to ask your law firm chair, practice area leader or mentor? Submit it anonymously here. 

In this installment, Harrity & Harrity LLP’s Elaine Spector offers advice on how attorneys can negotiate a flexible work arrangement that preserves their opportunity to advance professionally at a firm and safeguards their partnership prospects.

Q: As a parent who has enjoyed better work-life balance when working from home, how can I negotiate a flexible work arrangement with my law firm, and ensure the arrangement doesn’t hinder my career advancement, as we plan returning to the office? —Associate at midsize firm 

Women have been advocating for change with regard to work-life flexibility for years. Prior to the pandemic, many law firms were reluctant to allow remote work. Often, law firms equate lawyers who want to work remotely with a lack of commitment. As such, if a law firm actually agreed to a remote work arrangement, the lawyer working remotely would often be taken off the partnership track. And then the pandemic hit. Employers, including law firms, were forced to allow their lawyers to work from home. And what did they discover? That lawyers, as professionals, were able to be just as efficient and effective at home. In fact, many firms discovered that billable hours actually increased, as the pandemic eliminated commuting time and other commitments. However, many law firms are still reluctant to embrace the flexibility that would allow working parents, especially women, to thrive both at home and in the office. As offices begin opening back up, here are five tips for negotiating a flexible work arrangement that does not hinder your career advancement.

1. Determine your firm’s revised COVID-19 remote work policy. Before you begin your negotiations, determine your firm’s current remote work policy. Some law firms have taken the initiative to revise these policies prior to opening offices back up. It could be that your law firm has a modified policy that allows for remote work due to health and safety reasons born out of the pandemic, particularly one that does not take you off the partnership track, that you are unaware of. If your firm has not revised its policy or does not formally allow a remote work option, that fact alone doesn’t mean you can’t negotiate one. I was able to negotiate a remote work schedule when my children were very young. It happened during a job transition. A partner that I worked for in the past wanted me to join his new firm. At our first discussion, I asked him if they allowed for a remote work schedule. I was living in Baltimore, and knew that commuting to the District of Columbia five days a week was a deal breaker for me. He said he didn’t know, but that he would find out. The next day he got back to me and indicated that they could accommodate a remote work schedule for my situation. However, if I had not asked, I would not have been offered the option to work from home. So, don’t be afraid to ask about a remote work schedule when it is not clearly offered. You won’t know what options you can negotiate if you do not try.

2. Do exceptional work — become indispensable. It might go without saying that doing exceptional work provides you with a negotiation advantage. Your negotiating power increases dramatically when you do exceptional work and become indispensable to your firm. Not only should your legal work be exceptional, but it is also important to spend time thinking about how you can be a contributor at your firm. Look for high-value, low-commitment opportunities to get involved. This might mean taking on a mentoring role, joining firm committees, planning firm activities, representing your firm in the legal community, participating in external events and more. Designating just 30 minutes per week, whenever possible, to contribute to your firm’s initiatives allows you to maintain work-life balance while making yourself more valuable. Firms are more willing to negotiate with lawyers that they want to keep.

3. Be clear with your intentions. It is imperative to make clear your intentions to stay on the partnership track despite wanting flexibility to work from home after offices reopen. Although I was able to negotiate a remote work schedule, I was not clear with my intention to stay on the partnership track at my previous firm. This led to challenges in my ability to climb the ladder, like many women on flexible schedules face. When I interviewed for my current firm, I explicitly asked how working a remote and reduced-hour schedule would affect my ability to become partner. This outlined my intentions for the interviewer and compelled them to provide a clear answer about whether I would be treated differently based on my flexible status, rather than on my skills. Fortunately, I was told that it would not affect my partnership track whatsoever — a response that held up when I made partner just two years later. Do make it clear in your negotiation that working remotely does not equal a lack of commitment or a desire to abandon the partnership track, or whichever other career goals you are working toward.

4. Stay connected virtually. Relationship-building is the core of culture, inclusion and, ultimately, success at your firm. It is critical to continue to build relationships in the remote work environment. If you plan to work remotely either a few days a week or full time, I recommend having weekly virtual video meetings with the members at your firm you would typically interact with in an office setting. This type of face-to-face interaction is so much more engaging than a telephone call, as we have all experienced during the pandemic, and can allow for better communication through gesture and expression. When holding the video call, put an emphasis on personal connection. You can talk about your life to whatever extent you feel comfortable sharing, whether it be your weekend, your family or a new TV show, just as you would in the office. This watercooler talk, untied to any pressing work matters, will transform your internal relationships.

5. Find a firm that supports your family values and career goals. I began working remotely a few years before the pandemic hit. My firm allows for any lawyer at the firm, regardless of the numbers of hours they work or whether they show the requisite face time in the office, to make partner. And I did — remotely. Many of my female colleagues at other firms have reached out to me to ask: How can we keep the remote work going? How do we continue to develop relationships and culture within our firm? And how can someone make partner while working remotely? It is wonderful to be at a firm that unequivocally supports remote, flexible work. If your firm does not support a remote work schedule and is unwilling to compromise after you have a candid conversation, it may be time to consider switching employers. Regardless of your stature at your current firm, if they do not respect your need for flexibility, it will be hard to be fulfilled. 

Be open about finding a law firm that supports you where you are and what you need to be happy. After all, happy workers are more productive workers. As a mom who just dropped off her first child at college, I know that the time you have with your children is limited. Don’t ever sacrifice that time for a rigid policy of your employer. So many law firms are embracing this new way of working. Why be stuck at firm that is living in the dark ages?

Conclusion It is far past time to shift perspectives from the old, rigid mindset of the traditional firm, to one that embraces a more diverse and flexible workforce — one where we, as parents, don’t have to give up the important job of raising our children, while also providing top-quality service to our clients. Lawyers should not be excluded from partnership because they work remotely or are on flexible schedules. An attorney can contribute just as much to the success and advancement of the firm, its culture and its future without physically being in the office. In fact, the benefits of working a flexible schedule may contribute to more growth and innovation in the firm. Flexibility is essential for advancing talented women and other lawyers seeking balance in their life and careers. Good luck with your negotiations! 

Read more at Law360.com.

 

 

Law360 Analysis: Retiring Federal Circuit Judge Kathleen O’Malley ft. Eli Mazour

In Praising O’Malley, Attys Call For District Judge To Fill Seat

By Ryan Davis

Harrity Partner Eli Mazour is featured in Law360’s recent analysis regarding retiring Federal Circuit Judge Kathleen O’Malley as an IP expert..

Law360 (July 28, 2021, 9:43 PM EDT) — Retiring Federal Circuit Judge Kathleen O’Malley is the only member of the court who has served as a district judge, a background that attorneys say provided a necessary perspective that informed her incisive decisions and that they hope to see in her eventual replacement…

“Judge O’Malley’s departure will likely be cause for concern among patent owners, said Eli Mazour of Harrity & Harrity LLP, because she was viewed as more pro-patent than other Federal Circuit judges, particularly on the issue of patent eligibility.”

Read more on what Eli and the other experts have to say at Law360.com.

 

 

New Clause 8 Episode: Josh Landau – On Lobbying for Weaker Patent Rights and ‘Making a PB&J Sandwich’

Eli Mazour‘s Clause 8 Podcast, The Voice of IP, has returned for Season 2, featuring all new exclusive interviews with the intellectual property community’s biggest names.

 


 

 

The first episode of this season of Clause 8 featured the most recent USPTO Director – Andrei Iancu – discussing his efforts to strengthen America’s patent system over the last three years. One of the most publicly vocal opponents of those efforts was Josh Landau, patent counsel at the Computer and Communications Industry Association (CCIA). Now that those views are in ascendancy in the Biden administration and Congress, it made sense to finish this season by talking to Josh.

This is an incredibly insightful episode exploring first hand how the patent process helps innovative individuals and small companies bring their ideas to fruition. Listen here!


On today’s podcast:

  • The role of the CCIA in the patent debate
  • The failure of Section 101 legislation in the last Congress
  • The “patent quality” problem
  • How the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) operates
  • Patent policy advocacy on Capitol Hill
  • Patent policy in Trump v Biden administration
  • Is the patent system unfair to patent owners in any way?
  • Why do different patent attorneys have such different views of the patent system?
  • US inventors
  • The “peanut butter and jelly sandwich” patent

 

You can subscribe and listen to the full episode on your favorite podcasting app and learn more at voiceofIP.com. All Season 2 episodes are available now!

 

New Clause 8 Episode – Mark Han: Applying Lessons from Intellectual Ventures to Helping Innovative Doctors

Eli Mazour‘s Clause 8 Podcast, The Voice of IP, has returned for Season 2, featuring all new exclusive interviews with the intellectual property community’s biggest names.

 


 

 

Don’t miss this latest episode of Clause 8 with President and Chief Legal Officer of IntuitiveX, Mark Han, about the new business model IntuitiveX created to help innovators in the medical field.

Mark cut his teeth working for the largest and most notorious “patent troll” Intellectual Ventures (IV).  During the episode, Mark talks about what he learned from that experience and why he’s now excited to be in the business of bringing new products to market and building  new companies at IntuitiveX.

This is an incredibly insightful episode exploring first hand how the patent process helps innovative individuals and small companies bring their ideas to fruition. Listen here!


On today’s podcast:

  • Intellectual Ventures
  • How to identify and acquire valuable portfolios
  • The “patent troll” narrative
  • How IntuitiveX is advancing medical innovations
  • What IntuitiveX looks for in innovators and their inventions
  • Taking Amplify Surgical from idea to market

 

You can subscribe and listen to the full episode on your favorite podcasting app and learn more at voiceofIP.com. New episodes drop every Tuesday!

 

New Clause 8 Episode: AIPF’s President Chris Agrawal on Growing $1 Billion Portfolio & Succeeding in IP Field

Eli Mazour‘s Clause 8 Podcast, The Voice of IP, has returned for Season 2, featuring all new exclusive interviews with the intellectual property community’s biggest names.

 


 

 

 

Chris Agrawal is President of the Association of Intellectual Property Firms. He’s also the reason Eli got into patent law in the first place. If you’re a startup founder worrying you’re already behind on building a portfolio of patents, or you’re wondering how to scale your patent program, listen here!

 

You can subscribe and listen to the full episode on your favorite podcasting app and learn more at voiceofIP.com. New episodes drop every Tuesday!

 

New Clause 8 Episode: Judge Alan Albright On Becoming the Go-To Judge for Patent Cases

Eli Mazour‘s Clause 8 Podcast, The Voice of IP, has returned for Season 2, featuring all new exclusive interviews with the intellectual property community’s biggest names.

 


 

 

If you’ve ever wondered how and why Judge Alan D Albright of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas became America’s go-to judge for patent cases, you don’t want to miss this episode of Clause 8. Listen here!

Judge Albright is as transparent in this episode as he is in the courtroom. So if you’re wondering how to make your case more efficient, how you can clerk for him, or why it’s easier to predict where to be struck by lightning than how to become a district court judge, don’t miss him on this week’s Clause 8.

On this podcast:

  • Judge Albright’s love for patent cases & why it’s not really work for him
  • Plan to handle growing docket of patent cases
  • Getting into patent law as the youngest magistrate judge in history
  • Why many district court judges aren’t interested in handling patent cases and how it impacts their resolution
  • Example set by Judge John Ward and Eastern District of Texas
  • Why patent owners deserve a jury trial
  • Picking effective patent litigation counsel
  • Discovery disputes
  • Approach to attorneys filing transfer motions
  • Advice to trial attorneys for preparing and being effective
  • Navigating Federal Circuit decisions and focusing on being a good trial judge
  • Following press coverage & commitment to transparency
  • Clerking for Judge Alan Albright
  • Why you shouldn’t – or possibly should – wear python boots to the courthouse

You can subscribe and listen to the full episode on your favorite podcasting app and learn more at voiceofIP.com. New episodes will drop every Tuesday!

 

New Clause 8 Episode: Professor Stephen Yelderman – A Personal View of How the Supreme Court Approaches IP

Eli Mazour‘s Clause 8 Podcast, The Voice of IP, has returned for Season 2, featuring all new exclusive interviews with the intellectual property community’s biggest names.

 


In today’s incredibly candid episode, Prof. Stephen Yelderman shares stories about his journey into patent law, why he chose to become a patent agent, meeting Justice Amy Coney Barrett, clerking at the Supreme Court, and the creative ways companies try to influence the Supreme Court. Listen here!

Prof. Yelderman insights are not to be missed by anyone who is interested in having a better understanding of how the Supreme Court approaches IP issues, how the patent system truly works, and how to succeed in the legal field.

“A piece of advice I have is when an opportunity comes, say yes to it because you oftentimes don’t have good visibility to all the doors that will open down the road.”

On the episode:

  • From engineering at Stanford to patent law to clerking at the Supreme Court
  • Perspective about the patent examination process from working as a patent agent in Silicon Valley
  • Academic consensus that leans into an anti-patent direction
  • Misguided thinking about “patent quality”
  • Different approaches to anticipation and obviousness during USPTO examination, PTAB proceedings, and district court litigation
  • Meeting and working with ACB before she joined the Supreme Court
  • The one patent case ACB decided before joining the Supreme Court that cited one of Prof. Yelderman’s articles
  • How and why the Supreme Court approaches IP cases differently from other case
  • Impact of Breyer and Kennedy
  • Gorsuch’s correct approach to patent cases & the one case he got wrong
  • Why Gorsuch’s concerns regarding the PTAB are likely to be the future consensus
  • Efforts to influence Supreme Court & impact of atmospherics on the justices’ decisions regarding patent cases

You can subscribe and listen to the full episode on your favorite podcasting app and learn more at voiceofIP.com. New episodes will drop every Tuesday!

 

New Clause 8 Episode: Andrei Iancu – From Communist Romania to USPTO Director

Eli Mazour‘s Clause 8 Podcast, The Voice of IP, has returned for Season 2, featuring all new exclusive interviews with the intellectual property community’s biggest names.

 


 

If you’re keen to follow in Andrei Iancu’s footsteps, to be a future director of the USPTO, or to find out how to communicate with the new director, check out this latest episode of the Clause 8 podcast.

On the episode:

  • From communist Romania to USPTO
  • How the IP system has dealt with the pandemic
  • How patent policy develops in an administration
  • The two jobs of the PTO director
  • The best way to communicate with a USPTO Director
  • Response to those who think Iancu did too much, too quickly
  • What makes employees successful at the USPTO
  • Andrei’s advice to younger patent attorneys

You can subscribe and listen to the full episode on your favorite podcasting app and learn more at voiceofIP.com. New episodes will drop every Tuesday!

 

Image Rights: Alexandria, VA – January 5, 2018: Portrait of Andrei Iancu, Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). (Photo by Jay Premack/USPTO) 

 

Clause 8 Podcast is Back!

Eli Mazour‘s Clause 8 Podcast, The Voice of IP, has returned for Season 2, featuring all new exclusive interviews with the intellectual property community’s biggest names.

In the latest episode, Eli sits down for an interesting conversation with former USPTO Director, Andrei Iancu. Listen here!

You can subscribe and listen to the full episode on your favorite podcasting app and learn more at voiceofIP.com. New episodes will drop every Tuesday! You won’t want to miss next week’s guest!

 

Elaine Spector Presents at 2021 TIGER Innovation Conference: Advancing Equity in Innovation

Harrity’s Elaine Spector, joined by Ayana Marshall, presented on diversity-related issues in the field of IP for Emory Law’s 2021 TIGER Innovation Conference: Advancing Equity in Innovation. The conference explored issues concerning gender and racial gaps in the innovation system such as access to resources for entrepreneurs who are women and people of color and the underrepresentation of diverse inventors in the patent system and included several expert speakers in this area.

Elaine’s presentation focused on Diversity in Patent Law: A Data Analysis of Diversity in the Patent Practice by Technology Background and Region, a topic on which Elaine & data analyst LaTia Brand co-authored an article of the same title. Elaine also discussed several of Harrity’s Diversity Initiatives aimed at addressing the lack of diversity in our field by increasing the pool of diverse candidates and providing resources for those individuals to succeed.

You can watch the full presentation here:
Part 1

Part 2


To learn more about Harrity’s diversity efforts, visit harrityllp.com/diversity. For more diversity resources, check out The Diversity Channel.

 

Harrity to Donate to Charity & Gift Oculus Quests to Winners of This Challenge

Harrity & Harrity, LLP is launching a new challenge to test participants’ ability to draft an overview description and a claim for an electronic invention. Winners of the challenge will receive a free Oculus Quest Virtual Reality Headset!

The Harrity Writing Sample Test is used in our application process to screen candidates based on their patent application writing ability.  All identifying information is removed prior to grading the test in order to remove any unconscious bias and ensure that the test is evaluated solely on the quality of the candidate’s submission.  For this challenge, the Writing Sample Test will be graded based on four areas of criteria: Writing, Technical Proficiency, Instructions, and Claim.  Contestants must earn a minimum passing score of 90 points (out of 100) to win an Oculus.  The test takes, on average, 2 hours to complete. While Harrity receives hundreds of applications every year, less than 10% of applicants pass the Writing Sample Test.

While only the top performers will win an Oculus, Harrity is adding another reason to participate. The firm will donate $100 to its Harrity 4 Charity partner charities for every individual that takes the test. Participants can choose how to divide up the donation between the American Heart Association, ZERO: The End of Prostate Cancer, Inova Children’s Hospital, and No More Stolen Childhoods.

If you would like to partake in the challenge, the deadline to submit your Writing Sample Test is Monday, March 1st, 2021. Winners will be notified by email and announced to our Social Media Pages on Wednesday, March 3rd, 2021Feedback will be provided to all contestants via email whether or not they win the challenge, with the goal of helping each participant improve their writing skills.

There is a limit of one prize per person. You must be a registered patent agent or attorney with the USPTO to enter. 

Visit harrityllp.com/wst to take the challenge today!

 

IPWatchdog on Who Should Head the USPTO, ft. Eli Mazour

The Right Choice: IP Stakeholders Emphasize Practical Experience, Strong IP Advocacy in Next USPTO Head

By Gene Quinn

Harrity Partner Eli Mazour is featured in IPWatchdog’s recent article as an IP expert regarding what the profile of the next USPTO Director should look like.

January 26, 2021 (IPWatchdog) At 12:00pm EST on January 20, 2021, Joe Biden was sworn in as America’s 46th President. Over the next several months he and his staff will be working to fill thousands of positions within the federal government that have become vacant due to resignations. This is normal and expected. At the end of each presidential term all presidential appointees offer their resignation, which can then either be accepted or not at the discretion of the President.

The position of Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), as well as Deputy, is now vacant. Commissioner for Patents Drew Hirshfeld has been vested with the authority to act with the powers of the Under Secretary of Commerce for IP and Director of the USPTO, although he has not been given the title Acting Director. This is almost certainly due to the fact that no one in the federal government can hold a title of Acting head of an agency for more than 270 days.

In our space, the position of Under Secretary and Director of the USPTO is a front-line, top-level position. In the greater political scheme, it is likely we will not have an appointee for many months. President Obama did not nominate David Kappos until June 18 and President Trump did not nominate Andrei Iancu until August 26.

There are many capable people—all realistic, based on party affiliation—who should be considered by the Biden Administration for nomination as Under Secretary of Commerce for IP, but in my opinion several names stand out above everyone else based on their background, ties with the tech sector, and what appears to be a preference on the part of President Biden (at least so far) to appoint those with close ties to the Obama Administration and longstanding ties to the Democratic party..

See these suggestions, and what Eli and the other experts have to say on IPwatchdog.com.

 

 

IPWatchdog: Wish Upon a Star ft. Eli Mazour

Wish Upon a Star: Experts Share Their Wildest IP Dreams for 2021

Harrity Partner Eli Mazour is featured in IPWatchdog’s recent article as an IP expert.

January 4, 2021 (IPWatchdog) We have already published industry roundups on the biggest moments in IP for 2020 and predictions and thoughts for 2021. But the longest running industry insider feature on IPWatchdog is our annual “wishes” article. Each year, we invite stakeholders to share their wildest IP dreams and wishes for the coming year.

Unlike our Predictions and What Mattered roundups, this series allows our experts to get creative. The responses may have nothing to do with what is likely to happen, but rather gives commenters a chance to explain how 2021 would unfold in their dream scenario. This year, responses remained fairly grounded in reality, with the possible exceptions of hope for clarity on Section 101 law and other issues from the Supreme Court and that Andrei Iancu will remain USPTO Director under future President Biden…

See what Eli and the other experts have to say on IPwatchdog.com.

 

 

Patents for Humanity

By Edward Kim, Harrity Associate

Some time ago, in discussing humanitarian efforts and engineering, a friend of mine told me about a concept project he worked on to create a new iteration of the Leveraged Freedom Chair (LFC), an all-terrain wheelchair manufactured by Global Research Innovation and Technology (GRIT).  The original LFC was created by engineering graduates of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) to allow people with disabilities in developing countries to gain mobility and independence.  Conventional wheelchairs didn’t function well on the rugged terrain and rough local roads, and most were difficult and expensive to maintain.  The three-wheeled LFC uses a push-lever drivetrain to help people navigate over rugged terrain with ease and is built from commonly found bicycle parts to allow easy maintenance and repair.  Naturally, being an intellectual property professional, I started looking into patents related to the LFC.

That’s when I first discovered Patents for Humanity, an awards competition hosted by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO).  The creators of the LFC secured US Patent No. 8,844,959 in 2014 and was awarded a Patents for Humanity award in the subsequent year.  Nearly a decade has passed since the program itself started, but little is known about it.  Given the current situation with the global pandemic, and the season of giving around us, I thought it might be timely to share some information about the awards competition with our network of IP professionals.

Patents for Humanity was launched in February 2012 as part of an initiative to promote “game-changing innovations to address long-standing development challenges” and showcase how patent holders are pioneering innovative ways to provide affordable, scalable, and sustainable solutions for the less fortunate.  Awards have been given for innovations that range from Golden Rice that’s genetically enhanced to provide a source of vitamin A for people relying mainly on rice to the LFC to compact human wastewater converters called NEWgenerator.

Two types of awards are given – Patents for Humanity awards and Honorable Mentions awards.  Patents for Humanity award recipients are given an acceleration certificate, and of course, public recognition of their work at an awards ceremony sponsored by the USPTO.  The certificate can be used to accelerate a patent application examination, ex parte reexamination, and ex parte appeal to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.*  Honorable Mentions award recipients receive accelerated examination of one patent application but not other types of matters.

The program is open to patent owners, applicants, licensees (including inventors who haven’t assigned their ownership rights to others), assignees, and exclusive and non-exclusive licensees.  Applicants must describe how they’ve used their patented technology or products to address a humanitarian issue, which, for the competition purposes, is defined as “one significantly affecting the public health or quality of life of an impoverished population.”

Applicants using a patent application as a basis for entry to the competition must show that a Notice of Allowance for one or more claims from that patent application has been issued before any certificate is awarded.  Applicants mainly compete in the following five categories:

  • Medicine: any medical-related technology such as medicines, vaccines, diagnostics, or medical devices.
  • Nutrition: technologies which improve nutrition such as higher yield crops, more nutritious food sources, food preservation, storage, or preparation.
  • Sanitation: improving lives by addressing environmental factors such as clean water, waste treatment, air pollution, and toxic substances.
  • Household energy: technologies providing power to energy-poor homes and communities for household needs like lighting, cooking, and heating.
  • Living standards: technologies that raise living standards to empower people to escape poverty, such as literacy, education, communications, information delivery, access to markets, and microfinance.

Applicants may also team together to submit joint applications explaining actions taken by multiple parties.  However, only one certificate will be issued to the joint applicants, and the certificate can be redeemed for only one matter.

The applications are then judged under one of two criteria: (1) Humanitarian Use (applying eligible technologies to positively impact a humanitarian issue, focusing on demonstrable real-world improvements) and (2) Humanitarian Research (making available patented technologies to other researchers for conducting research with a humanitarian purpose, particularly areas lacking commercial application).

The applications are reviewed and scored by qualified judges outside of the USPTO, and the USPTO forwards the top-scoring applications to participating federal agencies for award recipient recommendations.

As we prepare to bid farewell to a year that will live in infamy, I think it’s fitting to recognize this year’s award recipients: Global Vision 2020; Sisu Global; Sanaria Inc; Flexcrevator; NEWgenerator; Nonspec; Rubitection; and Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.  Congratulations!  Perhaps, now more than ever, we need and should honor more innovation that makes progress in human lives.  Keep an eye out for the next awards competition application period.

More information about the Patents for Humanity awards competition can be found at:

https://www.uspto.gov/ip-policy/patent-policy/patents-humanity

For those interested in the details of the Terms and Conditions:

https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/USPTO-P4H-2020Terms.pdf

 

*Inter partes matters and other post-grant proceedings may not be accelerated with the certificate at this time.

 

Maximize Your Patent Portfolio Using Helferich-Style Claims

By Michael Woodward, Harrity Associate

Patent owners often obtain patents to protect products, as well as complementary products or use cases associated with those products. However, when selling or licensing the patented products, a patent owner may inadvertently extinguish potential revenue streams associated with the complementary use cases due to the doctrine of patent exhaustion.

Patent exhaustion follows the basic idea that if a company sells or licenses a patented product to a buyer, the company cannot sue the buyer (or a third party that the buyer provides the patented product to under the license) for patent infringement for using the product. Patent owners should take care when preparing and licensing patents to ensure that infringement claims for complementary products or use cases associated with patented products are not exhausted by the sale or licensing of the patented products, as shown by the Federal Circuit case of Helferich Patent Licensing v. New York Times, 778 F.3D 1293 (Fed. Cir. 2015)…

Keep reading on IPwatchdog.com.

 

 

Core Wireless: Parsing the Data on Enforcement Trends Three Years On

By Alexander Zajac, Harrity Associate

To many patent practitioners, the Federal Circuit’s decision in Core Wireless Licensing S.A.R.L. v. LG Electronics, Inc. was a watershed moment. In particular, this decision provided that claims directed to “display interfaces” that “improved” on existing interfaces were patent eligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101. In other words, Core Wireless decreased the chances of a court finding a graphical user interface (GUI) patent to be directed to ineligible subject matter and therefore invalid.

We don’t have to look far to see the impact that the nearly-three-year-old Core Wireless decision has had. Almost 100 district court decisions have cited the case since it came down in January of 2019, and nearly 30 inter partes review (IPR) proceedings filed after January of 2019 include citations of Core Wireless by practitioners, the Board, or both…

Keep reading on IPwatchdog.com.

 

 

Shawn Lillemo Named Intellectual Property Trailblazer

Harrity & Harrity’s Shawn Lillemo has been named as a 2020 Intellectual Property Trailblazer by the National Law Journal, which recognizes professionals who have moved the needle in the legal industry.

The publication says the following regarding Shawn’s contribution to legal technology:

Pioneer Spirit Launching his intellectual property career, Shawn Lillemo served as a patent examiner at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. In 2018, Lillemo jumped at the opportunity to join boutique patent firm Harrity & Harrity, LLP.  “Harrity operates more like a Silicon Valley start-up than a traditional law firm — with a passion to be on the cutting-edge of innovation — in an industry which otherwise hadn’t changed much in a hundred years.”

Trails Blazed Leveraging his skills as a software product manager, Lillemo created several products that allow attorneys to focus more of their time on substantively improving the quality of patents instead of on the menial tasks that can be automated.  Patent Draftr gives attorneys a suite of drafting tools that can “turn a 40-hour task into a 10-hour task.” Patent Searchr gives attorneys a state-of-the-art search engine for private patent portfolios so attorneys can find private and pending patent applications.   Lillemo’s Patent Sortr software replaces the labor-intensive task of creating patent asset taxonomies.  Now asset managers can know in real-time what patent assets they have in any given patent landscape.  “Each product was created with a simple goal: we want to allow our lawyers to be heroes to their clients and then go home. It’s doable if you automate as much as you can.” Harrity’s innovative approach to exceptional client services, led largely by Lillemo, landed the firm the 2020 American Legal Technology Award in the Law Firm category.

Future Explorations “We are on the cusp of many disruptive technologies transforming the way patent attorneys perform their work,” Lillemo believes, “including AI, blockchain distributed everything, and augmented reality.  I want to move Harrity and our clients to the front edge of the adoption curve in a work paradigm shift as significant as the industrial revolution.”

 

What External Ownership of Law Firms Could Mean for IP

‘External ownership of law firms could herald an IP revolution but clients will need to be convinced’

Over the summer two US states, Utah and Arizona, opened the door for non-lawyer ownership of law firms. Other parts of the US are also said to be looking at the matter, with the District of Columbia Bar reported to be considering relaxing its rules. What will the potential external ownership of law firms mean for the revolution of IP?

Interviewed by Richard Lloyd of IAM Media, John Harrity added his thoughts:

“New money coming in will be able to fund more technology and innovation, and more firms will realise that in order to stay competitive, they will need to embrace this technology to produce more efficient, accurate, and high-quality work.”

Read the full article only on IAM Media.

About Harrity & Harrity, LLP

Harrity & Harrity is a leading patent preparation and prosecution firm specializing in the electrical and mechanical technology areas, and is considered a Go-To Firm for the Patent 300™.  Their clients trust in their high-quality work, experienced people, industry leading innovation, and outstanding service.

 

Frank Jakes, Legendary Trial Attorney – Clause 8 – Episode 16

This episode of Clause 8 features an interview with trial attorney Frank Jakes – the founder of the Intellectual Property Group at the firm of Johnson Pope in Tampa, FL. There’s a good chance that you have recently seen him questioning Joe Exotic in the Netflix documentary Tiger King. However, even before successfully representing Carole Baskin and Big Cat Rescue, Frank Jakes was already a legendary trial attorney in Tampa who handled lots of cases involving high-profile parties and interesting personalities and won many millions of dollars in verdicts. Many of those cases involved a wide variety of IP rights.

Listen and subscribe on IPwatchdog.com.

 

Bunch O Balloons Inventor Josh Malone – Clause 8 – Episode 16

Tune into Eli Mazour‘s Clause 8 Podcast for an exclusive interview with Josh Malone – the inventor of Bunch O Balloons and America’s foremost advocate for reliable patent rights.

Josh came up with the idea for Bunch O Balloons to help his kids fill up 100 water balloons in less than one minute. It eventually became the most popular toy in America. However, before Bunch O Balloons even came to market, another company copied it and started selling its own versions of the product. Luckily – or so he thought at the time – Josh filed a patent application for his Bunch O Balloons invention. He did not know the enormous amount of time, money, and luck it would take to successfully enforce patents that covered his invention. This episode tells the story of what it took, including taking a trip to Bentonville, AR in the middle of the night to try to convince Walmart to stop selling knock offs of his product.

Listen and subscribe on IPwatchdog.com.

 

Kevin Jakel of Unified Patents Pt. 2 – Clause 8 – Episode 15

Tune into Eli Mazour‘s Clause 8 Podcast for the second and final part of our interview with Kevin Jakel, the founder and CEO of Unified Patents. On this episode, we continue the conversation with Kevin about how Unified Patents operates, discuss Unified Patents’ new program for targeting Standard Essential Patents (SEPs), debate whether the patent troll narrative has been overblown, talk about the patent quality problem, and delve into some other patent policy issues related to IPRs and the PTAB. We also find out what Kevin has in common with George Costanza!

Listen and subscribe on IPwatchdog.com.

Kevin Jakel of Unified Patents Pt. 1 – Clause 8 – Episode 14

Tune into Clause 8 Podcast as Harrity’s Eli Mazour delves into the unique and impressive story of Unified Patents with founder & CEO Kevin Jakel

“Either because it wants to keep patent owners on edge, does not want to provide ammunition to those who question how independently it really operates from its members, or for some other reason, Unified Patents has not publicly disclosed how it decides what patents to target. This interview with Kevin tries to resolve some of that mystery surrounding Unified Patents.”

Listen and subscribe on IPwatchdog.com.

#patents #ipnews #patentnews #unifiedpatents #interviews #patentinsights #podcast #subscribe #clause8 #elimazour #kevinjakel #patenttrolls #ptab #aia

IPWatchdog Picks Up Clause 8 Podcast

IPWatchdog, Inc., the largest online publication for IP news, is now home to Eli Mazour’s Clause 8 Podcast.

Mazour, Partner at Harrity, LLP and host of Clause 8, began the podcast in 2017 as a way to share his passion for discussing intellectual property issues. He routinely meets with the most interesting and influential personalities in the IP field, provoking intriguing conversations on modern patent processes and legal innovation.

Stay in the know by listening and subscribing now at https://bit.ly/39TZP2y.