Author: Kevin Tamm, Managing Editor, University of Cincinnati Law Review
I. Distinguishing a Patent Over the Prior Art with Unexpected Synergistic Results
The Federal Circuit and USPTO have set a high bar for an inventor to overcome a finding of obviousness in a patent application by using evidence of unexpected synergistic results. Synergy by itself is not enough to overcome an examiner’s prima facie case for obviousness; instead, the synergy must be unexpected or surprising and the applicant must show that it could not have been predicted based upon the cited references. Broad disclosures of synergy in the prior art weigh toward a finding of obviousness. Additionally, evidence of synergy over a broad range of compositions or components in the prior art, or in the application at issue, weighs toward a finding of obviousness. To show unexpected results, an applicant must provide a side-by-side comparison of the claimed invention with the closest prior art and explain why the results would have been unexpected by one of ordinary skill in the art.
Continue reading “Practical Considerations for Using Evidence of Unexpected Synergistic Results in Patent Prosecution”
Author: Erin M. Campbell, Esq.
Nursing home residents left to wallow in urine- and feces–soaked beds; a resident suffering from an open bedsore the size of a cantaloupe when persistent and purposeful under staffing leaves residents unturned and in unchanged diapers; residents suffering from repeat scabies infections; residents suffering very high rates of falls and perhaps even left lying overnight on the floor; residents whose diabetes is intentionally mismanaged so that the nursing home can seek higher reimbursements; residents whose untreated wounds result in amputation and death, and facilities falsifying records to hide inadequate staffing levels.
Continue reading “Why Not Protect Our Elderly, Our Pensioners, and Our State Treasury? The Case for an Ohio False Claims Act”
On Thursday, March 7, 2013 the University of Cincinnati Law Review launched the UC Law Review Blog in recognition of the fact that legal scholarship has taken to the blogs.
The goal of the UC Law Review Blog is to further legal scholarship through shorter, quicker, discussion-based discourse by contributors with practical experience, and to allow more student contributors to build domain expertise and be published in their profession. The Blog is designed to target practitioners and provides an outlet for legal discourse that is often not covered in traditional Law Review articles.
We are always accepting new blog submissions. We hope you follow us and and take part in the legal blogging movement!
Author: Kristen Dorsch, Associate Member, University of Cincinnati Law Review
In 2011, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) approved a plan to expand the number of available top-level domains beyond the widely-used “.com” and “.net” domains, in an effort to enhance diversity, choice, and competition on the internet. This unprecedented expansion will radically increase the number of available generic top-level domains (gTLDs) from fewer than twenty to more than a thousand. ICANN has proposed the Trademark Clearinghouse as a protective measure to safeguard the rights of trademark owners. The Trademark Clearinghouse will serve two primary functions: to authenticate and validate the rights submitted to the Clearinghouse; and to serve as a database to provide information to the new gTLD registries to support pre-launch Sunrise or Trademark Claims Services.
Continue reading “The Trademark Clearinghouse and ICANN’s New gTLD Program: Considerations for Trademark Rights Owners”
Author: B. Nathaniel Garrett, Editor-in-Chief, University of Cincinnati Law Review
President Abraham Lincoln signed the False Claims Act (FCA) into law 150 years ago on March 2, 1863, giving the United States a tool to combat fraud committed against the government. At the time, it was mostly Civil War defense contractors perpetrating fraud against the government. As initially enacted, the statute included double damages and a $2,000 per false claim penalty.
Continue reading “150th Anniversary of the False Claims Act”
The Ohio Supreme Court recently quoted extensively from a University of Cincinnati Law Review article. See PHH Mtge. Corp. v. Prater, 133 Ohio St.3d 91, 2012-Ohio-3931 (Sept. 6, 2012), at ¶ 16. The quoted excerpt and citation is provided below:
Continue reading “Citation Alert – OH Supreme Court”