Looking for breakthrough ideas for innovation challenges? Try Patsnap Eureka!

System & Method For Predicting Outcome Of An Intellectual Property Rights Proceeding/Challenge

a technology of intellectual property and system & method, applied in the field of automatic electronic system tools and methods, can solve the problems of inability to conduct inspection or review of cases, lack of electronic database accessible for general public to perform conventional search, and lack of case inspection operations

Inactive Publication Date: 2012-07-26
PATENT SAVANT
View PDF6 Cites 9 Cited by
  • Summary
  • Abstract
  • Description
  • Claims
  • Application Information

AI Technical Summary

Problems solved by technology

None of these systems, however, allow for inspection or review of cases that are still pending (not yet issued) or in a post-issuance proceedings.
The PAIR system as currently constituted and presented, however, does not contain any accessible electronic database to permit the general public to perform conventional search, inspection operations for cases.
For instance, in its current incarnation the user is required to know in advance and specify a specific case number (which may be difficult or impossible to locate) before they can see the data associated with such case, and even then the data is not organized in a fashion that makes it easy to review.
The PAIR system has been in existence for several years and yet has not been improved upon despite its obvious limitations.
In fact the PTO has made every effort to make the information difficult to obtain through a variety of access limiting mechanisms, including using CAPTCHA codes and timeout mechanisms.
As is apparent, this is extremely limiting as many persons do not know what these numbers are, and the PAIR system provides no insight or guidance on what the numbers might be.
Again, however, there is no general search capability at this point to allow the user to locate items of interest in the file, such as comments, text, etc., associated with this case (or other cases).
While the tabs are reasonably well organized, one other significant problem with the PAIR site is that it is extremely difficult to navigate within a conventional browser, because many of the conventional function buttons do not operate in a consistent manner.
For example while reviewing one screen, it is often impossible to simply go “back” one screen to look at another entry.
Instead, the page load fails and the user is required to resubmit the query all over again.
In addition, the system frequently times out and requires the user to re-log in all over again, which because of the recaptcha mechanism, is time consuming.
In turn this means that a large amount of very useful data is kept effectively hidden from the general public, which is undesirable and does not advance the purpose of the patent laws.
The problem is most acute in cases of reexaminations, which are a form of post-issuance patent challenge.
Since reexamination cases are frequently associated with ongoing litigation, the financial stakes are often high and the public interest factor much larger.
Yet as with un-issued cases the public is stuck using the very limited PAIR system for obtaining information about ongoing cases.
Because the data is effectively inaccessible, it is difficult to predict basic information about cases, such as how long they will last, what strategies work or do not work, etc.
Clearly, there is a need for systems and methods to improve the limitations in the current PAIR (and similar) systems and existing approaches might attempt to do so, but are not sufficient.
Despite the availability of public databases (e.g., USPTO PAIR, SEC EDGAR, et. al.) the organization of these data combined with the user access makes finding meaningful relationships all but impossible.
The plethora of available search engines (Google, Yahoo, Delphion, Dialog, et. al.) has not improved this situation: access to Public Sector Information is inadequate as evidenced by reports that this information is being under utilized resulting in missed opportunity.
But it is extremely difficult for a researcher to find relationships between information that are not already scripted by a database schema employed in the data storage system.

Method used

the structure of the environmentally friendly knitted fabric provided by the present invention; figure 2 Flow chart of the yarn wrapping machine for environmentally friendly knitted fabrics and storage devices; image 3 Is the parameter map of the yarn covering machine
View more

Image

Smart Image Click on the blue labels to locate them in the text.
Viewing Examples
Smart Image
  • System & Method For Predicting Outcome Of An Intellectual Property Rights Proceeding/Challenge
  • System & Method For Predicting Outcome Of An Intellectual Property Rights Proceeding/Challenge
  • System & Method For Predicting Outcome Of An Intellectual Property Rights Proceeding/Challenge

Examples

Experimental program
Comparison scheme
Effect test

example # 6

[0159]Example #6: Patent—this prediction tool can look at a target patent, and, based on its characteristics, determine a potential outcome and timing for a resolution. As is well-known, patents can be analyzed with respect to a number of different characteristics, including general technology area, specific classification, specification word content, claim wording / content, inventor pedigree, assignee name, priority date, citations, prior art cited, underlying Examiner, and many other factors known in the art. Using these characteristics the system can compare the target patent against all (or some selected group) of patents which have been subjected to reexamination to determine the probability of success, timing, etc. It should be noted that the outcomes can be specified with different degrees of granularity, so that for example, specific target claims can be examined within the target patent, along with the patent as a whole.

[0160]The data predictions can be used, of course, in a...

the structure of the environmentally friendly knitted fabric provided by the present invention; figure 2 Flow chart of the yarn wrapping machine for environmentally friendly knitted fabrics and storage devices; image 3 Is the parameter map of the yarn covering machine
Login to View More

PUM

No PUM Login to View More

Abstract

A networked computer system permits users to rate and predict outcomes of hypothetical submissions provided to a target entity. By analyzing the target entity's prior submissions, the strength of a patent can be assessed prior to licensing, enforcement, etc. against a set of prior art references to determine the patent's future robustness.

Description

RELATED APPLICATION DATA[0001]The present application claims the benefit under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) of the priority date of Provisional Application Ser. No. 61434588 filed Jan. 20, 2011 and Ser. No. 61442049 filed Feb. 11, 2011 both of which are hereby incorporated by reference.[0002]The application is further related to the following applications, all of which are filed on this same date and incorporated by reference herein:[0003]System & Method For Assessing & Responding to Intellectual Property Rights Proceedings / Challenges; Ser. No. ______ (attorney docket number PS2012-1);[0004]System & Method For Locating & Assessing Intellectual Property Assets; Ser. No. ______ (attorney docket number PS2012-2);[0005]System & Method For Facilitating Sequential Review of Restructured Protected Data; Ser. No. ______ (attorney docket number PS2012-3);[0006]System & Method For Compiling Intellectual Property Asset Data; Ser. No. ______ (attorney docket number PS2012-4);[0007]System & Method For Analy...

Claims

the structure of the environmentally friendly knitted fabric provided by the present invention; figure 2 Flow chart of the yarn wrapping machine for environmentally friendly knitted fabrics and storage devices; image 3 Is the parameter map of the yarn covering machine
Login to View More

Application Information

Patent Timeline
no application Login to View More
Patent Type & Authority Applications(United States)
IPC IPC(8): G06Q10/04G06Q50/10
CPCG06Q10/0633G06Q10/10G06Q50/184G06Q10/0637G06F16/951
Inventor GROSS, JOHN NICHOLASSALE, KENMEYER, ALANBOASSO, KEN
Owner PATENT SAVANT
Who we serve
  • R&D Engineer
  • R&D Manager
  • IP Professional
Why Patsnap Eureka
  • Industry Leading Data Capabilities
  • Powerful AI technology
  • Patent DNA Extraction
Social media
Patsnap Eureka Blog
Learn More
PatSnap group products