Imagine That IP Law Blog

Congratulations! You are ready to file a United States (U.S.) non-provisional patent application for your invention. This is a major milestone for any startup. But what comes next? Is it just a waiting game? Well ... maybe not.

A challenge with the standard patent process is that U.S. non-provisional patent applications are subject to the overburdened queues of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). USPTO statistics for an application show that the Traditional Total Pendency is 26.1 months to 42.9 months. (See Pendency Statistics USPTO from July of 2024). This means that ... Read More ›

Final rejections are inevitable in patent prosecution, often requiring patent practitioners and applicants to carefully consider their next steps. While a Request for Continued Examination (RCE) is a common option, it is not always the most cost-effective, especially when a response can be submitted within the shortened two-month statutory window. Fortunately, there are alternative routes to address final rejections before resorting to an RCE, including filing a response under the After Final Consideration Pilot Program 2.0 (AFCP 2.0) or under 37 CFR § 1.116 (1.116 ... Read More ›

The case of Contour IP Holding LLC v. GoPro, Inc. is the first time since October 2021’s Cosmokey Sols. GMBH & Co. KG v. Duo Sec. LLC, 15 F.4th 1091  where the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has reversed a district court holding of ineligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101. Accordingly, the Federal Circuit’s September 9, 2024 decision provides valuable insights into how patent eligibility is assessed, particularly for innovations related to video technology.

Background of the Case
Contour IP Holding LLC (“Contour”) filed suit against GoPro, Inc. (“GoPro”) for ... Read More ›

On September 3, 2024, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit rendered a significant decision in Broadband iTV, Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc., which reaffirms the stringent approach towards patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101. The case concerned five patents owned by Broadband iTV (BBiTV), all related to video-on-demand technology and electronic program guides. BBiTV accused Amazon of infringing these patents, but Amazon successfully moved for summary judgment on the grounds that the patents claimed ineligible subject matter. The Federal Circuit affirmed ... Read More ›