Register | Login
Intellectual Property Today
RFC Express - Document Management System

CAFC Happenings

By John L. Rogitz of Rogitz & Associates

John Rogitz has conducted extensive domestic and foreign prosecution in the areas of computer hardware and software for high-tech institutions. He has also conducted extensive patent prosecution in the biomed field, including medical instrumentation, as well as in the fields of superconductors, magnetic resonance imaging, materials and consumer electronics. Mr. Rogitz can be reached at 619-338-8075.

- 1 -

Direct Infringement:  To find indirect infringement, someone, somewhere must directly infringe ‑ perform all claimed elements ‑ meaning that some patents can't be infringed.  When the acts of multiple parties are required to stitch together all claim elements (and hence direct infringement), and those parties are working at arm's length from each other (i.e., one party is not contracting out infringing sub‑elements to surrogates), there is no direct infringement by any single entity and hence indirect infringement cannot lie, BMC Resources, Inc. v. Paymentech, L.P. (2006‑1503).

- 2 -

Section 101 Statutory Subject Matter: Dissatisfied that the screws have not been sufficiently tightened on patentees, the CAFC in the next two cases forbid statutoriness under Section 101 from being conferred on (1) a claim allegedly covering human thought processes, and (2) an electromagnetic sign...

To view the complete article you must be logged in
Login Now

Not A Member Yet? Sign Up For A Free 10 Day Trial Account!

  © Copyright 2010 Intellectual Property Today
Download Adobe Reader for free