The Federal Government has appealed the recent Amazon case dealing with patentable subject matter. HERE is a copy of the Notice of Appeal (from Alan Macek's ippractice.ca). Unsurprisingly, the government is appealing on a long list of grounds.
An interesting background point - there may be an underlying clash between the "spirit" of the invention and what the claims actually say. For example, suppose that a person has invented a "business method" (whatever that is) but the actual claim says "A machine comprising..." - is the court and patent office bound to treat that claim as a claim to a machine (which is definitely patentable subject matter) and then deal with it under the usual rubrics of anticipation, obviousness, utility etc.? What if the claim is for "A system comprising..."? Supposedly, the purposive approach to claim construction does away the "spirit" of the invention, but some courts and officials keep on wanting to resurrect it under a different name...
Put your case clearly to the court, amend if need be, but don’t claim that
your sophisticated lawyers are confused.
-
In the early stages of patent infringement proceedings, each of the
respondents (defendants) argued that Scidera had not put its case
sufficiently clearly ...
2 days ago
No comments:
Post a Comment