Chicago IP Attorney & Lawyer : R. David Donoghue : Chicago IP Litigation Blog

This Friday, March 5, 2010, the Northwestern Journal of Technology & Intellectual Property hosts its Fifth Annual Symposium. The Symposium, titled "New Rules for a New Day," includes the following sessions:

• The Patenting of Social Interactions: Bilski Before the Supreme Court - a panel discussion on the Bilski case, what is at stake, and the Supreme Court's options featuring Professor Matthew Sag of the DePaul University College of Law; Professor Joshua Sarnoff of the Washington College of Law at American University; Professor Jonathan Masur of the University of Chicago Law School; and Daniel Williams, a Partner at McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP;

• Sharon Barner, Deputy Under Secretary and Deputy Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office will provide the luncheon keynote on "Strategies for the USPTO: Ensuring America's Innovation Future";

• Trademark and Copyright in the Days of Internet: The Google Influence - a panel discussion on the ramifications of the Google Books and Google AdWords cases and the protection of IP in the fluid landscape of the internet featuring Michael Baniak, a Partner at McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP and Professor Matthew Sag of the DePaul University College of Law;

• Who Defines the Law? USPTO Rule Making Authority - a panel discussion on recent court challenges to the USPTO's rulemaking and interpreting power, including the Cooper Technologies, Tafas, and Wyeth cases featuring Professor James Speta of the Northwestern University School of Law; Patent Docs author Donald Zuhn, a Partner at McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP; Nicholas Zovko of Knobbe Martens Olson & Bear LLP; and Professor Jonathan Masur of the University of Chicago Law School; and

• Redefining "Free": A Look at Open Source Software Management -- a panel discussion on the pitfalls and issues that arise when open source code is included in a deal featuring John Hines, a Partner at Reed Smith LLP; Jon Christiansen of EscrowTech International Inc.; Alfred Hanna, a Partner at Reed Smith LLP; and Joseph Herndon, a Partner at McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP.

More information is available at the Symposium's website. Registration for the Symposium is free. CLE credit will be available to attendees for a fee of $200.

• Email This
• Print
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The Supreme Court hears oral argument today in Bilski v. Kappos.  The Court will decide the proper test for Section 101 patentability and will either decide or at least significantly impact the patentability of software and business method patents.  Here are the questions presented:

1. Whether the Federal Circuit erred by holding that a "process" must be tied to a particular machine or apparatus, or transform a particular article into a different state or thing ("machine-or-transformation" test), to be eligible for patenting under 35 U.S.C. § 101, despite this Court's precedent declining to limit the broad statutory grant of patent eligibility for "any" new and useful process beyond excluding patents for "laws of nature, physical phenomena, and abstract ideas." 
    
2. Whether the Federal Circuit's "machine-or-transformation" test for patent eligibility, which effectively forecloses meaningful patent protection to many business methods, contradicts the clear Congressional intent that patents protect "method[s] of doing or conducting business." 35 U.S.C. § 273.

For more on the history of both the Bilski case, check out my recent article with my colleague Mike Grill in the Northwestern Journal of Technology and Intellectual Property.  Patently-O has compiled the amicus briefs -- click here for the briefs supporting Bilski or neither party, and here for the briefs supporting the government.  The briefs supporting the government include a brief by a group of Internet Retailers that, I am proud to say, cites my law review article arguing for an even application of the Twombly pleading standard as to both patent plaintiffs and patent defendants -- click here for the amicus brief and here for my article from the John Marshall Review of Intellectual Property Law.

Click here for the SCOTUSBlog's preview of the argument.  For post-argument CLE options, click here for a list of courses compiled by Patent Docs and here for information on a CLE from IPWatchdog's Gene Quinn, who plans to attend oral arguments.

• Email This
• Print
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Please join me this Friday, March 6 for the Northwestern Journal of Technology & Intellectual Property's annual symposium.  I will be moderating a debate over whether business methods should be patentable in light of the recent Bilski decision.  McDonnell Boehnen's Bob Irvine will argue for business methods and Knobbe Martens' Lauren Katzenellenbogen will argue against.  If that debate is not enough to get you to the Symposium, here is a sampling of the other excellent presentations:

• Email This
• Print
• Trackbacks
• Share Link