This article gives tips to obtaining a patent faster. The process itself is interesting and this article gives more context to the presentation earlier this week.

https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/290429

3 Approaches to Get Your Patent Application Moving Much Faster

Image credit: Shutterstock

The typical patent applicant at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) can expect to wait, on average, two years or more after filing, before that coveted U.S. patent comes through: USPTO statistics show that applications in the semiconductor field, for example, take an average 23.1 months from filing to issuance; and applications in the computer architecture field take an average 29.5 months.

Related: Before You Crowdfund an Invention, Consider Patent Protection

Such time frames are not ideal, considering that ideas get stolen or copied all the time. However, there are three approaches that savvy applicants can take, to expedite their applications through the agency, and get a U.S. patent in their hands within 12 to 18 months after filing.

It goes without saying that a speed-up like that helps entrepreneurs turbo-charge their patent-portfolio development and score some quick wins — to increase their company’s valuation in preparation of a funding event, perhaps, or to more quickly obtain patent protection for a soon-to-be marketed product.

Here are those three approaches:

1. Pay a premium.

The easiest and most potent way to expedite examination is to use the USPTO’s Prioritized Patent Examination Program (also known as “Track One”). Under the program, an applicant pays an extra fee (ranging from $1,000 to $4,000, depending on the applicant company’s size). That lets the application jump the line and be examined by the USPTO ahead of earlier-filed applications.

The USPTO’s stated goal is to see Track One examinations completed within 12 months, making this route highly appealing for applications in technologies that typically wait a long time to get through the USPTO.

But speed isn’t Track One’s only advantage. In certain technologies, it provides the additional benefit of yielding a higher average allowance rate than does conventional processing. For example, in the computer gaming field, Track One reduces the average pendency (time from filing to issuance) by more than 10 months and increases the average allowance rate by about 18 percent.

Gamblit Gaming and Game Play Network, for instance, have used Track One with impressive results, outperforming the overall gaming sector averages at the USPTO with average pendency times of 14-to-17 months (compared to the gaming sector’s average of 27 months) and allowance rates of more than 90 percent (compared to the gaming sector’s average of 70 percent).

Related: The Craziest Patents by Apple, Facebook, Amazon, Google and More

2: Get face time with the examiner.

Speaking with the USPTO examiner reviewing your patent application can be a simple but effective way to reach the issuance stage faster and more reliably.

While most communications between the USPTO examiner and the applicant occur in writing, the limitations of the written form can be both frustrating and inefficient for the applicant. For example, he or she might want to explain in person some nuanced distinction between the invention and what existed before; and there are times when fluid dialogue is far superior to time-consuming back-and-forth written communications.

Recognizing the inherent limitations of the written form, the USPTO allows applicants to speak directly with the USPTO examiner via telephone, web conference or in-person interviews.

The resulting interviews can prove tremendously helpful because they give the examiner a human face to associate with the application. Examiners are less inclined to make a flimsy or off-the-wall rejection of the application in a face-to-face meeting.

It can also be especially valuable to have the inventor participate in the interview, when, for example, the technology is complex, or there’s a compelling story regarding how the invention was conceived or the problem was solved. Examiners, from their perspective, are usually glad to meet inventors in person, too, since inventor participation signifies the importance of the application as opposed to one that’s run of the mill.

Interviews conducted early in the process can further help prevent misunderstandings that otherwise might result in a longer and more expensive patenting process. For example, using the USPTO’s First Action Interview pilot program, an applicant can request an interview before the examiner makes an initial full evaluation of the application. This gives the applicant the opportunity to influence the examiner’s understanding of the invention right from the start.

3: Hit the highway.

Another way to expedite a patent is to use the USPTO’s Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) to leverage positive results from an examination that has already been performed by a foreign patent office. Under PPH, the USPTO fast-tracks the examination of U.S. patent applications with claims already allowed by a foreign patent office in a corresponding patent application.

Currently, the foreign patent offices eligible for PPH review are those in Canada, China, Europe, Japan, Korea and the United Kingdom, as well as about 30 others.

While the USPTO still makes its own independent evaluation of the application, the PPH program can yield improved results over conventional processing. For example, in the computer-gaming sector, the PPH program reduces the average pendency to about 18 months, with an increase of the average allowance rate by about 10 percent.

The PPH program can be a particularly effective tool for companies with foreign patenting activities that are looking to take advantage of their successes in foreign patent offices to more quickly obtain the same scope of patent protection in the United States.

Related: Low-Cost Patent Search Options for Inventors on a Budget

Overall, few U.S. patent applicants will ever describe the patenting process as either quick or easy. But by using one or more of these methods, applicants can accelerate the process and increase their likelihood of achieving their patenting goals.

This article addressed the importance of remembering intellectual property in business.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/02/13/companies-failing-see-value-intellectual-property/

Companies failing to see value of their intellectual property

Bosses at some of the world’s most innovative companies, including BAE Systems, Siemens, Philips and Bayer, have warned that intellectual property (IP) is being neglected by the business world.

Research by patent specialist Aistemos has found that many opportunities are lost and innovation stifled because of systemic IP problems. The majority of respondents claimed that boards in their industries see IP as a cost center or a risk, with just a fraction admitting that it adds value.

They also stated that most business decisions are being made with a lack of understanding of the relevant IP. When it comes to research and development, collaborations, and even mergers and acquisitions business leaders only “sometimes” have the IP data they need to make an informed decision.

IP is often vital to a company’s future.

Defense giant BAE Systems, for example, currently owns more than 1500 inventions and has filed close to 250 patents per year for the last 5 years, ranging from lasers to augmented reality devices.

The new report highlighted several issues including a lack of transparency over who owns what IP, and a number of incomplete and inaccurate records.

Many businesses accidentally infringe others’ patents while innovation is stymied because companies are unable, or unwilling, to collaborate due to IP risk.  Joerg Thomaier, chief executive of IP at Bayer, the life sciences giant, who took part in the research, said: “Greater transparency on the patents covering a product would avoid situations where companies inadvertently infringe our patents. But for this to work, the whole industry will need to embrace the idea, and not all companies are open to greater transparency.”

Aistemos’s report warned that, with no universal method for including IP on the balance sheet, many investors were in the dark about the value of IP. Hywel Ball, a managing partner at professional services giant EY, said: “Given that more than half enterprise value is represented by intangible assets, for some companies up to 80 per cent, I worry that this value is not being represented by financial statements. This means that when you look at the stock market, the real value of those companies isn’t visible.”

Intangible assets, which tend to include IP, make up 53 per cent of the total value of the FTSE 100. Nigel Swycher, Aistemos founder, said: “The impact of technology and innovation across business of all types, from pet food to autonomous vehicles, means that there is no business large or small that can afford not to consider the implications of IP across the entirety of the business.”

This article is interesting. Qualcomm is making money from licensing its products, but companies that use their products, including Apple, have filed suit. The licensing agreements have shown to be lucrative for Qualcomm and a bit much for the companies paying for the license.

http://www.economist.com/news/business/21715705-its-biggest-customer-apple-suing-it-1bn-qualcomm-again-under-attack-living?zid=317&ah=8a47fc455a44945580198768fad0fa41

Qualcomm is again under attack for living large off its patent portfolio

Its biggest customer, Apple, is suing it for $1bn

This article ties into what we discussed this week, as it relates to protecting your business’ intellectual property.

How To Protect Your Intellectual Property The Right Way

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kathycaprino/2017/02/25/how-to-protect-your-intellectual-property-the-right-way/

 

Taxes are important to business and business owners. This article was enlightening. Using a platform to handle financial affairs rather than paper and pen is wise advise.

http://taxtrustestatenews.com/business-tax-law-2017/

Hacks For Business Tax Law In 2017
by Jeffrey R. Pittard | February 16, 2017

Business Tax Law Hacks for 2017

The new year promises to bring twists and turns to the business tax law landscape. Although it’s still in the early stages and nothing is certain, experts around the industry are advocating for companies to be prepared.

Stay on your toes

The Trump administration’s promise to create friendlier business taxes has the stock market flying high, but as of now, nothing has been set in stone. Recently, a U.S. Republican lawmaker told the U.S. Chamber of Commerce that the corporate tax reduction into the 15 to 20 percent range being sought by President Donald Trump will be difficult to pass, according to Reuters.

The lawmaker specifically honed in on the need to pass what’s known as border adjustability. Essentially, for the corporate tax cuts to be passed, the export tariff would have to be erased, while the import tax could see a rise to 20 percent, the source reported. This would have dramatic implications on a number of industries, including automakers and retailers.

A number of other legal bouts are currently being waged, according to CPA Practice Advisor. These include corporate rate reductions and a new tax system where the only income taxed is that which is earned inside the U.S.

“U.S. tax reform is more than just rate reduction, and any plan will likely have winners and losers. Company leaders need to model the impact of various proposals, aggressively engage with legislators and make their voices heard as the process moves ahead,” KPMG’s Jeffrey LeSage told the source.

As nothing is certain just yet, CPAPA recommended all chief tax officers stay tuned in to what’s happening on Capitol Hill so they can be prepared for any change that could come at a moment’s notice.

Ditch the pen and paper

LeSage also urged businesses to bring their tax departments into the digital era with a number of different tools, like platforms to analyze data, automation and even cognitive intelligence.

Not only will the aforementioned changes give your employees the gadgets they need to boost productivity and effectiveness, but they also allow them to be agile within their sector. The new regulations and legal updates approaching will mean compliance changes are ahead. Tax officers should be able to quickly ascertain any potential risk and ensure the business’ taxes are completed without potential liability.

Further to this point, partnering with an agency with years of experience working within the business tax law landscape could turn into a fruitful relationship as companies are likely to have their fair share of questions and concerns moving forward. Spending the money on a tax consultant could potentially save an organization from innumerable fines down the line.

Seek new talent

In line with the aforementioned point, CPAPA reported businesses will need to broaden the type of qualifications they look for in new hires, specifically pertaining to their tax departments. The word of 2017 is “nimble,” according to LeSage, and the skill set employees have in this sector will largely dictate the success of the company.

“Sometimes it’s tough to attract, develop and retain these professionals in tax departments,” LeSage told CPAPA. “Savvy leaders know that investing in rotations, cognitive training and leadership experience will help their people develop the skill sets and knowledge they need for them and their companies to succeed.”

Companies without the financial resources to hire new employees or revamp training to accommodate the changing business tax law landscape should consider turning to an experienced tax professional that can help identify which areas the organization is lacking in, and perhaps provide assistance in a number of different ways. The new year is primed for upheaval in the industry, and employers that are active, diligent and agile will ultimately avoid any unnecessary headaches.

https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2017/feb/21/cow-crowd-sustainable-beef-organic-food-seattle

This startup, Crowd Cow, works like most crowdfunding campaigns, which allows consumers  to become “steakholders” in the company and buy a cow to receive the meat straight to your doorstep.

“Crowd Cow, which started taking orders in mid-2015, is part of a growing movement to promote sustainable meat production. The startup creates a market for more grass-fed beef, which keeps more cows grazing on pastures and gives farmers a more sustainable alternative to raising calves to sell to factory farms.”

In this manner, Crowd Cow improves the clarity in the process of meat-processing and delivery. When people buy beef today at grocery stores, consumers do not know exactly where the meat came from or if the meat even came from one cow. Crowd Cow tracks the cow that the consumers place a “steak” in, so that people actually know of the sustainability alternatives to how to improve lucidity in this industry. Crowd Cow has the opportunity to serve that market niche, in turn creating a steadier market outlet for local farmers.

Thus, in the same way, crowdfunding startups have now become implemented in the meat industry that seeks to transform the traditional market to become better integrated with modern trends with consumers today that younger demographics who are especially motivated to make food choices that are in line with their values.

The following blogpost article from Harvard outlines important themes we’ve discussed thus far this semester about how the legal system can facilitate and encourage innovative entrepreneurship. The author’s research grapples with Mayer-Schoenberger’s proposed questions of risk, predictability, and legal certainty.

https://blogs.harvard.edu/ugasser/2008/02/11/how-can-law-foster-innovative-entrepreneurship-a-blueprint-for-a-re/

The following article from the World Intellectual Property Organization ties in nicely with Joe Barich’s presentation. It parses the dividing lines between technology, inventions, and patents. Additionally, its emphasis on the commercialization of ideas and emerging technological developments is apropos in light of our class’s focus on disruptive technology.

http://www.wipo.int/sme/en/documents/ip_innovation_development_fulltext.html

By emphasizing the relationship between incentives and economic growth, this article adds great insight into the effects that government and society have on patents and innovation. The author, Dr. Lybecker, makes an important connection between the strength of intellectual property rights and societies’ research and development efforts. Dr. Lybecker also traces the broad contours of U.S. jurisprudence to identify the judiciary’s integral role in the patent system.

http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2014/07/21/promote-innovation-the-economics-of-incentives/id=50428/

This article is a nice foundational piece that serves as an introduction to intellectual property. It also discusses the repercussions of patents that are too restrictive or too expansive.

http://www.kauffman.org/what-we-do/resources/entrepreneurship-policy-digest/how-intellectual-property-can-help-or-hinder-innovation