Blog

Michael Dilworth, Managing Partner at Dilworth IP, presented a talk on Intellectual Property basics for the Tsai Center for Innovative Thinking at Yale (CITY) on Wednesday June 13th.  Tsai CITY is a creative hub of Yale University that unites students, faculty and alumni across disciplines in order to cultivate innovation. […]

This is the first article in a review of patents issued in 2017 in the area of Fluid Catalytic Cracking (FCC).  The summary below covers six patents related to fluid cracking catalyst compositions/synthesis. One technique for categorizing patents related to Fluid Catalytic Cracking is to group them in certain categories:  […]

In Zeroclick, LLC v. Apple Inc., 2017-1267 (Fed. Cir. June 1, 2018), the Federal Circuit overruled the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California for improperly interpreting claims regarding the application of 35 U.S.C. §112, ¶ 6.  The case related to an appeal from an action where Zeroclick had […]

Dilworth IP will host its first Counsel to Counsel™ webinar panel on June 28th at 1:00 PM (EDT). In this series, in-house IP counsel members will be invited to share their insights and best practices. Michael Dilworth, Founder of Dilworth IP, will moderate this inaugural event, and will be joined by Catherine Toppin, Senior Patent […]

I recently purchased some bathroom lighting from a Big Box store, confident in my ability to perform the necessary carpentry and electrical work to install it myself.  I had to wait 10 or 15 minutes while an associate that I estimated at about 19, unenthusiastically pulled a huge ladder up […]

The Dilworth IP Team is excited to run in support the Hole in the Wall Gang, a charitable organization founded by Paul Newman in 1988. The charity runs camps and various other programs across the Northeast for seriously ill children and their families. On June 2nd, team members Michael Dilworth, Bill Reid, and […]

Buried amidst the flurry of recent Federal Circuit subject matter eligibility decisions is a question that could significantly change how Section 101 is applied in patent litigation.  Specifically, the issue is whether performing Step 2 of the Mayo/Alice test can require a factual inquiry.  If upheld, this interpretation of Alice could make patent litigation […]

Frederick Spaeth, Partner at Dilworth IP, was invited to speak at the 34th Annual Joint Patent Practice Seminar which took place at the Crowne Plaza Times Square in New York on Wednesday, May 2nd. The annual event, hosted by the Joint Patent Practice Continuing Legal Education (JPPCLE), is a one-day seminar […]

The cosmeceutical industry is ever more competitive and continues to grow with a myriad of new cosmeceutical products entering the market every day. Well-established and new companies are busily adapting to new trends created by people’s changing tastes. The total revenue of the U.S. cosmeceutical industry has only been increasing […]

For the first time since the Mayo Supreme Court decision of 2012, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) in Exergen vs Kaz has ruled in favor of the patent eligibility of a medical diagnostic invention.  While nonprecedential, this 2-to-1 decision is noteworthy for the guidance it provides to patent professionals seeking to protect diagnostic inventions.  Specifically, it instructs that diagnostic methods may be eligible for patent coverage so long as they use unconventional methods for detecting analytes.  Additionally, the Exergen decision offers another endorsement of the view put forth recently by the CAFC in Berkheimer v. HP and Aatrix v. Green Shades, that the inventive concept analysis that can arise in step-2 of the Mayo/Alice test is at least in part a factual question and not just a question of law.  This factual vs legal debate continues to have reverberations throughout the patent law field, affecting both the manner in which courts conduct 101 examinations as well as the conclusions they reach.