Recorded Webinar From March 20, 2019
Please join Fitch, Even, Tabin & Flannery LLP for a free webinar, “Back on Track?: Obtaining Software Patents Using New Patent Office Guidance,” on Wednesday, March 20, at 9:00 am PDT / 10:00 am MDT / 11:00 am CDT / 12 noon EDT.
Obtaining patents for software-related inventions has become more difficult in recent years, in the U.S. and throughout the world. However, recently released USPTO guidance addressing patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101 and § 112, among other developments, offers some amount of much-needed clarity and direction.
During this webinar, our presenters will share information and insights on the following:
- USPTO’s 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance
- USPTO’s 2019 Guidance on Examining Computer-Implemented Functional Claim Limitations
- How to use the recent guidance fruitfully, including claim-drafting strategies and evaluation of example claims
- Drafting strategies for filing software patent applications in foreign jurisdictions
- What the future may hold for software patentability
Our speakers will be Fitch Even attorneys Timothy R. Baumann and George N. Dandalides.
Tim has extensive experience assisting clients in the acquisition, protection, and management of all forms of intellectual property, particularly through complex patent prosecution, infringement and validity opinions, reexamination and IPR proceedings, and patent licensing agreements.
George focuses his IP law practice on domestic and international patent preparation and prosecution, leveraging his background in physics and computer technology to assist clients in a variety of high-tech industries including telecommunications, electronics, and computer hardware, software, and architecture.
- Leveraging Separate IPR Counsel to Maximize Litigation SuccessFitch Even Webinar: November 18, 2021 Read more
IP Alert | USPTO Abused Discretion by Allowing Further Abuse by Ex Parte ReexaminationOctober 22, 2021
On September 29, in In re Vivint, Inc., the Federal Circuit clarified the interplay between petitions for IPR and a subsequent request for ex parte reexamination. Read more