In this webinar, you’ll get the story of how the USPTO first began systematically denying patentability to software inventions long before Alice v. CLS Bank International.
Panelists Chris Holt, Vice President of Patent Analytics, LexisNexis PatentAdvisor® and Megan McLoughlin, Product Director, PatentAdvisor™ discuss the following in detail:
- Before Alice, a large number of examiners were consistently refusing to give patentable weight to “non-functional descriptive material”
- Many of these examiners are now the same examiners that refuse to allow software applications in view of patentable subject matter standards that have arisen since the Alice decision
- Some examiners are even now continuing to utilize the “non-functional descriptive material” rejection basis
- The long-standing and obvious connection between assignment of an application to an art unit and aggressive utilization of the non-patentable subject matter rejection
Source: all ip
Get to know your examiner better with more context and a deeper understanding of your examiner’s behavior than ever available before.
With your free trial, you will gain instant access to:
Examiner Search allows you to search by examiner name for a filterable, examiner specific dashboard of patent analytics, including rejection specific statistics, appeal statistics, prosecution statistics, interview statistics, a backlog of RCEs and timeline.
QuickPair easily replaces the USPTO Public PAIR by providing the most robust application details anywhere, including examiner timeline, examiner allowance rate and the average time and number of office actions to allowance.
PatentAdvisor, the first-ever data-driven patent strategy tool, provides a systemic approach to crafting an effective prosecution strategy. Understand why certain patent applications take longer than others to reach allowance—then use that knowledge to devise better patent prosecution strategies.