Archive for the ‘News’ Category

Extrait du Inventor’s Eye du USPTO Automne 2014: des brevets de baseball

November 7, 2014

U.S. Patent Number 4,910,814

Patents Pick-5
America’s Pastime Patents
Cooling weather, changing leaves, and the start of holiday preparations – for many, these signs of the changing season are first in mind when autumn arrives.

But for me, the fall means something else. The crack of the bat, a 98 mph heater in the crucial 9th inning, and the champions of so many memorable World Series, including the 1979 Pirates, the 1983 Orioles, and the 1988 Dodgers. Along with all the memories and fun, baseball would also be less enjoyable without proper equipment to keep the players safe. And guess what, there are patents for all of that!

Note: This article is part of an ongoing series detailing some of the Inventors Eye staff’s favorite patents. For each article, the writer selects their five favorite patents under a given theme. This list is from Management and Program Analyst Bruce Mihalick.

Baseball Cleats
U.S. Patent No. 1,867,219

This invention by George W. Harper of McNeil, Arkansas, was patented on July 12, 1932. While spiked shoes had been in use for quite some time, Harper’s baseball cleats changed the way sports footwear was designed. His innovation, was not only essential to running and the protection of a player’s foot, but also provided the traction necessary for stopping while being safer for defending players. As we all know, Ty Cobb had other (infamous) uses for the metal spike cleat prior to Harper’s invention.

Armor for Base-Ball Players
U.S. Patent No. 925,851

Having received a patent for this chest protector on July 7, 1908, former White Sox catcher Billy Sullivan was one of the few professional baseball players who actually invented equipment for the game he played and loved. I like this invention for obvious reasons: imagine unsuccessfully trying to catch a 95 mph fastball with no chest protection . . . ouch!

Fielder’s Glove
U.S. Patent No. 1,426,824

Other than the ball itself, a glove (or mitt) is the most basic and essential piece of equipment a baseball player needs. Most every kid who has played the game from little league on up has that favorite glove that they took months to break in just right. While players had been using gloves at least 50 years earlier, William L. Doak of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, earned a patent for this fielder’s glove on August 22, 1922. Doak’s glove uniquely employed a net between the thumb and the index fingers, an important innovation in glove design that is still used today.

Improvement in Masks (Catcher’s Mask)
U.S. Patent No. 200,358

Before the invention of this mask, which has been said to resemble a very sturdy birdcage, baseball catchers played bare faced. Even today, with all the refinements and improvements that have been made to face mask technology, catchers are injured more than any other player besides pitchers. Imagine trying to catch a curve, slider, or fastball and you miss and take it squarely on the mouth, or your nose, or in the eye! First introduced by Harvard University’s baseball team, this innovation was patented by Frederick W. Thayer, the team’s manager, on February 12, 1878.

Adjustable Batting Tee
U.S. Patent No. 2,616,692

Batting tees have been a training aid for many years and are key to helping youngsters learn the game of baseball. However, one of the primary challenges with many tees is that they are not height adjustable. This invention, patented by Roy C. Bird from Ann Arbor, Michigan, on November 4, 1952, helped players set the tee’s height to find their correct swing plane. What better way to learn and develop hand-eye coordination and proper swing mechanics? No doubt this invention has been used by many a little leaguer dreaming of being the next Bryce Harper!

Bruce Mihalick : Office of Innovation Development


Article: Intellectual property considerations for medical devices

October 14, 2014

De l’European IPR Helpdesk: Intellectual property considerations for medical devices

Un programme de maitrise en ligne de droit US des brevets

October 1, 2014
University of New Hampshire School of Law





Dear Adam Mizera,


To intellectual property professionals and academics around the world, the name “Franklin Pierce” means world-class IP education and entrepreneurship. Launched in the fall of 2010, the University of New Hampshire School of Law’s Franklin Pierce Center for Intellectual Property builds on the pioneering IP work with which the school has been associated since 1973.


The University of New Hampshire School of Law is pleased to announce a Master degree and LL.M. degree in Intellectual Property are now available in two new formats, designed for professionals around the globe.


The Master degree is appropriate for engineers, scientists, or business professional who seek specialized training in patent law.


The LL.M. degree is appropriate for domestic and international attorneys who seek specialization in patent law.


In addition to enrolling in our residential program here in the United States, students now have the option of enrolling in a limited residential program or online program.Our limited residential program allows an individual to enroll in August for 1 semester (4 months) and then finish the balance of the program online. Our online program allows individuals, who cannot travel abroad, the ability to complete the program completely online. Students who pursue any one of these options will earn the same University of New Hampshire School of Law degree. For more information on these programs please see the following url:


We would appreciate it if you could please forward this information to those individuals whom you think may be interested in acquiring a specialized patent law degree. If you have questions or concerns, please feel free to contact our office at:




Debra A. Beauregard

Director of Graduate Programs

University of New Hampshire School of Law

WIPO Pearl launched, a Free Multilingual Terminology Database

September 22, 2014

Selon le site: Through its web-based interface, WIPO Pearl promotes accurate and consistent use of terms across different languages, and makes it easier to search and share scientific and technical knowledge.

Base de données de “dons” de brevets par différentes compagnies comme l’a fait récemment Tesla

June 17, 2014

Voir le lien suivant:

Brevets célèbres de l’histoire du cinéma

April 3, 2014

Des brevets de Disney, Lucasfilms entre autres à voir ici:

Formation gratuite en ligne sur la commercialisation de la recherche dans le domaine de la santé

January 21, 2014

Un lien à transmettre à vos contacts dans le domaine des sciences de la vie ou appareils médicaux

E-learning courses on commercialising research in the health sector:

Reportage video de la CBC sur les Patent Trolls ou Non-Practicing Entities au Canada

January 6, 2014 

Joyeuses fêtes! (Cliquer sur image pour voir une animation de dessin industriel de circonstance)

December 20, 2013


Des idées-cadeaux pour les agents de brevets dans vos vies

December 19, 2013

(Il y a des produits pour les agents de brevets (non-“attorneys”) à la fin de la liste…)

Le 5 novembre, une date d’anniversaire avec une leçon sur comment un agent de brevet décrirait une voiture

November 5, 2013

Extrait de:
(en date du 5 novembre- le fichier ne sera plus là demain)

Mais voici le brevet discuté ci-dessous:

1. The combination with a road-locomotive, provided with
suitable running gear including a propelling wheel and steering
mechanism, of a liquid hydrocarbon gas-engine of the compression
type, comprising one or more power cylinders, a suitable
liquid-fuel receptacle, a power shaft connected with and arranged
to run faster than the propelling wheel, an intermediate clutch or
disconnecting device and a suitable carriage body adapted to the
conveyance of persons or goods, substantially as

Extrait de l’article d’Art Cashin:

An Encore Presentation

On this day in 1895, a patent was issued to George B. Selden. It
was the kind of patent mere mortals could only dream of. It ranked
at or above those granted for the telephone or the electric light.
What was it that Selden had invented that was so great – – it was
the automobile – – only Selden didn’t invent it.

Selden was a clever chap who had noticed the products being
produced by the Duryea Brothers and Ransom Olds, in the preceding
two decades. He had even read of the work of Karl Benz in

Since he was a patent attorney, he devised a broad based patent to
cover all future automobiles. As the 1900’s began, autos began to
sell. Selden grabbed some Wall Street buddies and began to sue the
early producers. Each one caved and Selden’s Association of
Licensed Automobile Manufacturers began to get a royalty from

In 1903, a guy named Henry Ford applied for membership. Hoping to
up the ante, they turned Ford down. Ford (my hero – – he once said
the role of your body is to carry your brain around) choose to keep
making cars. For six years, they fought in Federal Court. Then a
judge said Selden’s patent was valid. The effect was electric.
Everybody, including GM, decided to pay. Selden and the Wall Street
types, sensing billions, magnanimously offered to let Mr. Ford pay
at the old rate.

Ford told them where to place their offer and took them to Appeals
Court, claiming the patent was too broad and counterclaiming they
owned him and other damages. Two years later a judge with a sense
of humor and a way with words held that Ford was right. Knowing
when to cut and run (and save damages), the Selden/Wall Street
Crowd puppied up. The automobile business was wide open and Ford
became a multi-billionaire.

To celebrate pull in to the Pierce Arrow Drive-In Tavern and
winterize with as much anti-freeze as you like. But don’t put both
feet on the running board.

Rétablissement de brevets abandonnés “intentionnellement” aux États-Unis

October 9, 2013

Jurisprudence US: licences hydrides de brevets

July 19, 2013

Résumé de

Kimble v. Marvel Enter., Inc.

Court: U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals

Docket: 11-15605 Opinion Date: July 16, 2013
Judge: Callahan

Areas of Law: Intellectual Property, Patents

Plaintiff sued Marvel for patent infringement and breach of contract, claiming that it had used his ideas in developing a Spider-Man role-playing toy called the "Web Blaster" without compensating him. The parties subsequently agreed to settle the case while appeals were pending and executed a Settlement Agreement. Thereafter, Marvel entered into a licensing agreement with Hasbro giving it the right to produce the Web Blaster. At issue was the calculation of royalties for subsequent iterations of the Web Blaster. The court joined its sister circuits in holding, pursuant to Brulotte v. Thys Co., that a so-called "hybrid" licensing agreement encompassing inseparable patent and non-patent rights was unenforceable beyond the expiration date of the underlying patent, unless the agreement provided a discounted rate for the non-patent rights or some other clear indication that the royalty at issue was in no way subject to patent leverage. Accordingly, the court affirmed the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Marvel, concluding that plaintiff could not recover royalties under the Settlement Agreement beyond the expiration date of the patent at issue.

Description des problèmes avec le projet “paperless” au USPTO

July 18, 2013

Un article du New Yorker

Les brevets avaient mené au développement du premier photocopieur!

April 17, 2013

Un extrait intéressant d’un site décrivant l’histoire de Xerox :

Upon graduating from high school, Carlson worked his way through a nearby junior college where he majored in chemistry. He then entered California Institute of Technology, and was graduated in two years with a degree in physics.

More problems faced Carlson as he entered a job market shattered by the developing Depression. He applied to eighty-two firms, and received only two replies before landing a $35-a-week job as a research engineer at Bell Telephone Laboratories in New York City. As the Depression deepened, he was laid off at Bell, worked briefly for a patent attorney, and then secured a position with the electronics firm of PR. Mallory & Co. While there, he studied law at night, earning a law degree from New York Law School. Carlson was eventually promoted to manager of Mallory’s patent department.

“I had my job,” he recalled, “but I didn’t think I was getting ahead very fast. I was just living from hand to mouth, and I had just gotten married. It was kind of a struggle, so I thought the possibility of making an invention might kill two birds with one stone: It would be a chance to do the world some good and also a chance to do myself some good.”

As he worked at his job, Carlson noted that there never seemed to be enough carbon copies of patent specifications, and there seemed to be no quick or practical way of getting more. The choices were limited to sending for expensive photo copies, or having the documents retyped and then reread for errors.

A thought occurred to him: Offices might benefit from a device that would accept a document and make copies of it in seconds. For many months Carlson spent his evenings at the New York Public Library reading all he could about imaging processes. He decided immediately not to research in the area of conventional photography, where light is an agent for chemical change, because that phenomenon was already being exhaustively explored in research labs of large corporations.

Ce qui a mené au brevet suivant : et au développement de la compagnie Xerox, etc. (Voir le premier lien pour l’histoire complète)

Scintillae of inventiveness or imagination #3

December 14, 2012

Articles repérés cette semaine:

Dessins industriels US: bientôt valables pendant 15 ans + changement sur le minimum requis pour avoir une date de dépôt US : revendications ne sont plus nécessaires

– New free chemical patent search tool:

-Infos sur brevet unitaire en Europe :

-Factsheet on Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Mechanisms                         Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Mechanisms

-IP E-learning tools for SMEs  – To access this tool, please click here

-“Agreeing a Price for Intellectual Property Rights” Booklet; to freely download the booklet, click here.


Comparaison de pratique pour le critère “inventive step” au Japon/Chine/Corée du Sud

April 13, 2012

Voir le lien: 

Un nouveau test en 3 parties pour la nouveauté de brevets au Canada?

March 15, 2012

Wenzel Downhole Tools Ltd v National-Oilwell Canada Ltd 2011 FC 1323, 98 CPR(4th) 155, Snider J

L’extrait pertinent du test:

The first branch of the test is disclosure. The question of disclosure raises three distinct sub-issues:

1. Does the prior art contain the subject matter defined by the ‘630 claims?
2. Was the prior art disclosed before the ‘630 Patent claim date?
3. Was the disclosure of the subject matter of the ‘630 Patent available to the public?
[95] Only if the answer to all of these questions is affirmative, will the Defendants be able to establish the first branch of the test set out in Sanofi-Synthelabo, above.

Sondage: Réputation de la Chine en matière de protection de la PI-taux net de satisfaction de 20% comparé à 60% pour les États-Unis

December 5, 2011

Voir les résultats de sondage effectué par le cabinet Allen & Overy auprès de compagnies multinationales

Voir les pages 8, 9 et 13 du document suivant pour un graphique/article  intéressants

Voir un résumé du rapport dans le South China Morning Post

Le groupe produit également une carte interactive intéressante au niveau mondial: investment perspectives

Article intéressant sur comment les brevetés d’origine chinoise sont favorisés lors de litiges en Chine

November 21, 2011

Un article référé par mon père de 84 ans 🙂

L’article a aussi des références intéressantes sur les chances de gagner en litige pour les brevetés en Allemagne, UK, etc.

Voir l’article de The Gazette