Remember Me
forgot your password?

Jump on your Intellectual Property Rights

"Jump on Your Intellectual Property Rights"

If you are a startup business looking for financing, you should already have (1) acquired your IP rights (patents, trademarks, and copyrights) and (2) cleared your business of any IP infringement. Investors and competitors respect the value of patent and trademarks and applications for them. Investors should not invest in a startup, unless they are assured that its product or service is not infringing another’s IP rights.

There is a saying in the law, “don’t sleep on your rights.” If you do not affirmatively acquire what could become your patent and trademark rights, you will lose the opportunity to do so. To often today a startup is shut down because it is infringing another’s patent or trademark rights. That shut down could have been avoided with appropriate foresight. The infringed patent or trademark is one that the startup could have obtained for itself by applying for those IP rights, — if it had acted early enough. Alternatively, an early due diligence search could have identified another’s IP rights that covered the proposed product or service, thereby providing time for a design around and negotiations for a license to the problem IP rights.

Patents provide a limited monopoly on your company’s new product or process. Monopoly translates into high profit margins due to a lack of competition. Patents can be obtained on almost any product or process that is useful, novel, and non-obvious. Under prevailing case law, usefulness extends to any method of calculating a number that has real world utility, including business methods, and the novelty and non-obviousness requirements are not as high a standard as many people believe.

Trademarks (and service marks) indicate the source or origin of a product or service. Source or origin means that a consumer can identify your product or service in the marketplace, and thereby avoid using another’s similar product or service.

United States patents and trademarks are obtained by filing an application for them in the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). The USPTO then examines the application for compliance with all statutory requirements, and eventually issues complying applications and rejects noncomplying applications. Obtaining these IP rights is expensive, primarily due to the amount of high hourly rate attorney time required to prepare an application and guide it through the USPTO. For patents, part of that cost can be deferred by initially filing a relatively simple provisional patent application the filing date of which is prima facie proof of the date of invention. A provisional patent application protects for one year the right to pursue patent protection on the novel aspects of a product or process at a very low cost, and it is accorded respect by inventors and competitors. However, to get a patent, a provisional application must be followed within one year of its filing, by filing a more formal US application and any foreign applications to obtain the benefit of the filing date of the provisional application.

Substantial information on patents and trademarks is provided at the USPTO’s website at http://www.uspto.gov.

Copyright Richard A. Neifeld, President, Neifeld IP Law, PC

If you have any other questions or need further information please feel free to contact us via email at www.Neifeld.com

Richard A. Neifeld

Richard Neifeld, Ph.D.
Patent Attorney
Email address: general@neifeld.com

Education

J.D. The George Washington University Law School 1994
Ph.D. Rutgers University (Solid State Physics) 1985
B.S./B.A. University of Rochester (Physics and Mathematics)
(Cum Laude and Honors) 1980

Experience

Neifeld IP Law P.C. - 2002

Partner in the IP law firm of Oblon, Spivak, McClelland, Maier & Neustadt, PC. - 1996

Patent Attorney - 1994

Patent Agent - 1992

Patent Technical Consultant - 1990

Staff Scientist for the U.S. Army's Laboratory Command - 1986

Post-doctoral Fellow, Rutgers University - 1985-1986

Former chair of the Interference Committee and current chair of the Services Subcommittee of the Interference Committee of the American Intellectual Property Lawyers Association (AIPLA). Member of the AIPLA, American Bar Association, Maryland Patent Lawyers Association, and the Patent Information Users Group. Extensive experience in "specialty matters" in the U.S. patent office, such as appeals, petitions, reexaminations, reissues, public protests, and extensive experience in foreign prosecution, and interferences and related litigation. Extensive experience in due diligence work, including investigations, database searching, and opinions.

Admitted to practice before the United States Patent and Trademark Office, the Virginia State Courts, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, and the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.

Widely published in IP law publications, frequent lecturer to patent attorneys on patent law topics, and an active member of the patent bar associations. Founder and moderator for the popular "patentinterference" group on the groups.yahoo.com/group/patentinterference web site, which is a forum for general information on patent law and practice with a focus on patent interference issues.

Co-founder of the www.PatentValuePredictor.com automated patent valuation service, co-inventor of the underlying macro-economic model for valuing patents, and programmer of some of the code powering the automated valuations.

Five years of scientific research in applied physics areas of electro-optics, III-V materials, microwaves, vacuum deposition technology, superconductors, and electronics directed towards the U.S. Army's electronics, communication, and signal processing needs.

Rate this Article: 0 / 5 stars - 0 vote(s)
Print Email Re-Publish

Add new Comment



Captcha

  • Latest Patents Articles
  • More from Richard A. Neifeld

Steps to Conduct a Patent Search

By: John Mathew | 10/11/2009
A patent refers to the right granted to an inventor for discovering any new machine, useful process or a manufacturing item.

Can I really sell my idea?

By: Russell Williams | 06/11/2009
Yes; however, it is important to understand what you need to have in place to increase your odds of success. As you move your idea through the invention and patent process, your odds of success increase as your idea becomes more tangible and real.

Company Incorporation -The Procedure for Incorporating A Company in India

By: chaman | 28/10/2009
Company incorporation is the act of making an official application to Companies House to create a company, which is well known the process of formation or process of incorporation. Full company name, the officers of the company and the principal address of the company on the register of companies held at Companies House are required to formalize the formation of a company.

Will Riches Come From Your Invention Submission

By: Oli Osorhan | 27/10/2009
Overcome the barriers of making money from your revolutionary idea. The 4 barriers that stand in your way of obtaining a patent and selling it.

What is the difference between an idea and an invention and how do I properly document my idea?

By: Russell Williams | 26/10/2009
The dictionary defines an invention as “a device, contrivance or process originated after study and experiment.” An idea is defined as “a formulated thought or opinion.”

What do I need to think about first in taking my idea to market?

By: Russell Williams | 21/10/2009
Many inventors believe that they need to spend tens of thousands of dollars developing and manufacturing their ideas on their own to succeed, which is why you read so many stories about inventors who spent their life savings chasing an invention. While manufacturing is one option for certain inventors, it is not the most common option and certainly not the least risky.

Supreme Court of India adjudicates on dichotomy introduced for the first time by the Patents (Amendment) Act, 2005, in the Patent Law

By: Sudhir Kumar | 20/10/2009
Supreme Court of India in its civil appellate jurisdiction adjudicated on a Patent dispute titled J. Mitra & Co. Pvt. Ltd. versus Asst. Controller of Patents & Design. & Ors.The Supreme Court granted the leave and directed the High Court to adjudicate the matter in interest of justice for only two appeals of such kind were pending in the High Courts. The special circumstances arises because of dichotomy introduced for the first time by the Patents (Amendment) Act, 2005

How to get a Patent

By: NoroIP | 19/10/2009
A quick guide to the patent process. Includes important terms. While fairly straightforward, the technical terms and legal aspects of filing a patent application can be confusing. I’ve attempted to outline the patent process step-by-step and include simple explanations of patent terminology you will encounter along the way. It should be noted that getting a Trademark or Copyright follows a very different process.

The CAFC Decision in Tafas v. Doll (Fed. Cir. 3/20/2009)

By: Richard A. Neifeld | 19/07/2009 | Patents
On March 20, 2009, a panel of the Court of Appeal for the Federal Circuit ("CAFC") decided the USPTO's appeal of the District Court decision enjoining the USPTO's rules limiting applicants’ rights to file claims, continuations, and Requests for Continued Examination (RCEs). However, the panel was fractured, with a two panel member majority opinion (Judges Prost and Bryson), a concurrence (Judge Bryson), and a concurrence in part and dissent in part (Judge Radar).

The Decision on Rehearing in Amgen, Inc. v. Human Genome Sciences, Inc. (HGS) -

By: Richard A. Neifeld | 03/07/2009 | Patents
The Decision on Rehearing in Amgen, Inc. v. Human Genome Sciences, Inc. (HGS) - Interference 105,613 - Teaching Points on Interference Practice

Can you Sue "the State" for Patent Infringement?

By: Richard A. Neifeld | 24/05/2007 | Intellectual Property
Review of case law regarding protecting patents from infringement by the state.

Strategies for Preparing for a Patent Interference

By: Richard A. Neifeld | 24/04/2007 | Patents
Preparing for a successful patent interference and clues one winning.

Comments on United States Patent Assignment Information

By: Richard A. Neifeld | 24/04/2007 | Patents
The text below is a copy of an email that I sent the Patent Interference User's Group (PIUG) on November 4, 2003, regarding United States Patent Assignment Information. My email was in response to a chain of emails discussing contents and accuracy of assignment information provided by the commercial database providers.

Electronic Notebooks and the Requirements to Prove Date of Invention in Patent Interferences

By: Richard A. Neifeld | 24/04/2007 | Patents
This paper contains an excerpt of an email I sent to the PIUG (Patent Information User's Group) email distribution list on November 30, 2003.

A Supplemental Note on the Medical Practitioner's Act

By: Richard A. Neifeld | 24/04/2007 | Patents
immunity from liability from patent infringment

Patent Valuation From a Practical View Point, and Some Interesting Patent Value Statistics From the Patentvaluepredictor Model

By: Richard A. Neifeld | 24/04/2007 | Patents
A review of how to treat patents from a financial and tax reporting standpoint.

Submit Your Articles Free: Signup
Article Categories




Use of this web site constitutes acceptance of the Terms Of Use and Privacy Policy | User published content is licensed under a Creative Commons License.
Copyright © 2005-2008 Free Articles by ArticlesBase.com, All rights reserved. (0.05, 1, w1)