Sentences with phrase «only utility patents»

So cases involving design patents constitute a small percentage of patent litigation compared to the number of cases involving only utility patents (historically, just under 10 % and declining to less than 5 % in 2012 and 2013).

Not exact matches

As Gary Stix reviewed in «Owning the Stuff of Life,» in the February issue, companies and universities have been on a spree of patenting not only whole genes but also genetic fragments of unknown utility.

In letters and speeches, both have argued that only inventors who clearly describe the «utility» of a gene, such as a plan to develop a medical product, deserve to win a patent.

If the patent specification does not promise a specific result, only a «scintilla of utility» is required.

German utility models are sort of second - class patents: they are valid for only ten years, and they are not examined.

This ruling is not thermonuclear on its own, but in its aftermath, we will not only see a lot of wrangling over a judgment as a matter of law to overrule the jury and over injunctive relief but there will also be, even more importantly, a push by Apple to enforce many more design patents and utility (hardware and software) patents against Samsung.

In 2016, almost 10 000 European patents were validated in Poland by foreign entities while only 67 applications for utility models were filed.

Just as Eli Lilly unfortunately found in atomoxetine, it is very difficult to switch from an unsuccessful argument for actual utility to sound prediction — because one is left with only the disclosure of the patent (and not the extensive tests relied on for actual secret utility).

Such a disgorgement is only permissible if at least one design patent was infringed (it's impermissible for infringement of utility patents) and (which is not specific to design patents but to all patent damages under 35 U.S.C. § 287 (a)-RRB- if the infringer had «actual or constructive notice of the patent» (as Judge Koh described the requirement in her damages order).

However, utility patents can only be granted to inventions that qualify, and functionality is a basic criteria for qualifying inventions.

Unlike Utility Patents, which protect function, Design Patents only protect the look.

[9] Justice Rennie of the Federal Court has adopted this approach and held there is «new law» that now ««proper disclosure» of utility applies only to new use patents» — otherwise no disclosure is required in the patent for a sound prediction.

Significantly the Federal Court of Appeal emphasized: (1) only if an inventor makes «an explicit promise of a specific result, then utility will be assessed by reference to the terms of the explicit promise»; (2) as there is no obligation to disclose utility in a patent, one can not assume every patent has an explicit promise; and (3) where there is no explicit promise, a «mere scintilla» of utility will suffice.

The promise doctrine was initially only envisioned for use where an express promise regarding utility has been made within the patent.

Design patents, unlike the utility patents we usually feature, consist only of a single claim followed by pictures.

Unlike utility patents, design patents have only one claim and usually have little or no written description.

Holders of utility patents enjoy a 20 - year monopoly, whereas design patent holders only have a 14 - year monopoly.