Computer implemented methods, software patent applications 
We understand that every client and every invention deserves personalized care. For example, a startup company client that needs to defend itself against the patents of aggressive competitors may need a different IP strategy than an solo inventor whose objective is to license or sell his technology to an existing company. A mid sized or large company may have goals of licensing or cross licensing some technology to reduce risk and increase revenue. We learn about each of clients’ technologies and business strategy, so that we can tailor an intellectual property strategy to help achieve the client's goals.
The law for computer implemented inventions, software inventions and business method is complex and continuously changing. For example, the October 2008 CAFC, In re Bilski case will be heard and decided apon by the US Supreme Court in 2009. In Re Bilski held that a process, including a business method, only qualifies as patentable subject matter under the “machine-or-transformation test” if: 1) the process is tied to a particular machine or 2) it transforms a particular article into a different state or thing. The Supreme court decision may have a major impact on computer implemented inventions and business methods. Because of the changing Federal case law and Patent Board of Appeals (PBAI) cases, patent prosecution is complicated and care must be taken in writing patent applications to include subject matter and support to try to anticipate further law changes.
| Obtaining a broad, strong and defensible patent requires expertise in computer related patent law and a deep understanding of the invention. William Stoffel ESQ. uses his expertise in computer hardware and software patent Law to obtain patents for clients. |
Related information:
Software v. computer implemented inventions - Patents in the EPO – New online presentations
http://patent-ip.spaces.live.com/blog/cns!F38277E32784504E!173.entry
Supreme Court to review In Re Bilski – controversial business method case
http://patent-ip.spaces.live.com/blog/cns!F38277E32784504E!170.entry
Guidance for Examining Process Claims in view of In re Bilski Memo (signed 7 January 2009)
http://patent-ip.spaces.live.com/blog/cns!F38277E32784504E!154.entry
MPEP 2106 Patent Subject matter Eligibility
http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/mpep_e8r6_2100.pdf