News

Recently, Patexia released its 5th Patent Intelligence Report which provides data on the value of patents as assets and ranks patent firms, companies and attorneys in high-tech and bio-tech based on their number of patents as well as interviews with the USPTO examiners over the past year.

John Russell is among the attorneys whose activity and performance was under evaluation. He achieved noted recognition for his work and classified as one of the Top Attorneys for Patent Prosecution. Based on their initial review, he is ranked within the Top 10 for multiple categories within the publication.

As a small women-owned firm making waves in field of Intellectual Property, McCoy Russell continues to gain recognition for the success of its patent prosecution strategies and the quality of our patent applications.

Aiming to increase accessibility to the patent system, The USPTO and its Counsel for Inclusive Innovation launched its First-Time Filier Expedited Examination Pilot Program.

This program expedites the first office action and there is no petition fee while applying for this program through a petition to make special. These petitions will be accepted under this program until March 11, 2024, or until 1,000 patent applications have been granted special status under this program, whichever occurs earlier.

McCoy Russell has dedicated staff with the technical expertise to help inventors participate in the patent system and take advantage of this program. McCoy Russell is particularly experienced in filing accelerated examination petitions.

Bringing together the most influential business and legal brand professionals from across the globe, INTA’s Annual Meeting is set for May 16 -20 in Singapore. With its membership across 181 countries, INTA’s Annual Meeting is the largest gathering of its kind and McCoy Russell is looking forward to attending.

Featured programming, business development, discussion on brand rights and IP innovation INTA is a unique opportunity to develop and deepen relationships and collaborate in developing ways to protect and promote the rights of Trademark owners.

McCoy Russell congratulates the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) for being one of the few recipients for the USPTO’s Patents for Humanity Award in the category of COVID-19. Winners receive an acceleration certificate to expedite select proceedings at the USPTO, along with public recognition of their work.

As one of NIH’s contracted law firms, McCoy Russell was invited to participate in the information session held March 23 covering the details of the acceleration certificate. McCoy Russell has substantial experience in biotechnology and medical devices, as well as with these special USPTO procedures, and looks forward to continuing to support the NIH in developing and securing its intellectual property.

Continuing to take an active role the startup community in Portland, McCoy Russell is pleased to support Doug Wells as he continues his involvement with SCORE as a Subject Matter Expert. Doug will be ad-hoc counseling SCORE Mentors and helping with outreach to improve awareness of SCORE resources to help people in northwestern Oregon start and grow business.

Doug will be presenting at SCORE’s March Mentorship meeting on Intellectual Property.

McCoy Russell congratulates Marina Chong on passing the Patent Bar Exam. Marina Chong is now a Patent Agent with the firm providing technical expertise over a wide range of scientific and chemistry fields.

She is looking forward to gaining more experience with patent prosecution, communication with Examiners, and helping clients developing their intellectual property portfolios. Outside of the firm, she is “further looking forward to the looks of confusion she will receive from those not familiar with the intellectual property world”, when she explains that she is now a patent agent.

McCoy Russell congratulates Co-founding Partner Anna McCoy on her inclusion in WTR1000 – The World’s Leading Trademark Professionals 2023. Anna is recommended as an expert, being a “hands-on partner who tailor makes her solutions and never gives cookie-cutter advice” notes the publication.

Anna spearheads McCoy Russell’s active trademark specialty practice and is active in developing patent prosecution strategies at the firm including a specialty in design patents.

McCoy Russell is a boutique women-owned intellectual property firm focused on the prosecution and development of patent and trademark portfolios. The practice spans all areas of IP law, including helping clients build strong patent and trademark portfolios, and helping them obtain value through licensing and enforcement of portfolio assets.

Free Patent Examiner and Art Unit statistics are officially live at ironcrowai.com/prosecution-statistics.

IronCrow AI, the software arm of McCoy Russell, has compiled prosecution statistics for all 10,000+ patent Examiners and 500+ Art Units in the USPTO. These Art Unit and Examiner statistics include:

Allowance Rate: The percentage of all applications under a given Examiner or Art Unit which are eventually allowed.

Allowance Rate Comparison: A bar chart showing the allowance rate of a given Examiner/Art Unit relative to other organizational units within the USPTO.

Prosecution Timeline: A timeline showing how the population of pending applications under a given Examiner or Art Unit evolves over time (e.g., by being allowed or abandoned).

Prosecution Speed: Estimates the amount of time between filing an application and reaching final disposition under a particular Examiner or Art Unit. Equivalent to the half-life of a pending application.

Office Actions: The total number of Office Actions issued by an Examiner or Art Unit divided by the total number of applications processed by that Examiner/Art Unit, can be thought of as the likely number of Office Actions issued for an application before a final disposition is reached.

Restrictions: The total number of restriction requirements issued by an Examiner or Art Unit divided by the total number of applications processed by that Examiner/Art Unit. Equivalent to the probability of receiving a restriction requirement.

Interview Benefit: The allowance rate for applications in which at least one Examiner interview is conducted minus the allowance rate for applications in which no Examiner interview is conducted.

Appeal Success Rate: The percentage of appeals in which the Examiner or Art Unit is reversed.

Examiner Contact Info: The email address and phone number for all active patent Examiners.

High-priced firms have been taking advantage of paid examiner statistics for a long time because they know that the data helps. With free, up-to-date prosecution data, every patent practitioner can now be on a level playing field. Make patent examiner statistics a part of your practice today by accessing this free resource at ironcrowai.com/prosecution-statistics.

Encountering failures during the innovation process is inevitable. As discussed in Part 1 (link here), these failures along with the identified solutions can and should be part of an overall integrated strategy for building an intellectual portfolio that maximizes valuation. However, inventors are often so focused on protecting what went right, that they forget to protect what went wrong. Additional prompts may be needed to pull out all protectable aspects around a new technology and ensure that the coverage includes both the successes and the failures.

Below are some sample questions you might use when working with inventors to ensure that a comprehensive IP strategy is developed that protects the full scope of the invention.

What problems were encountered when developing the invention, and what were the successful and unsuccessful ways you tried to solve them?

Conception to successful implementation almost never occurs without encountering some problems and failures along the way. As discussed in Part I, not only are the successful approaches valuable, but the less than optimal solutions can also be valuable valuable intellectual property.

What goes wrong if you substitute a material or if process parameters go outside of disclosed ranges?

Often, inventing a new product or process can also include figuring out how to break the product or process by pushing operating parameters too far or trying common substitutions for certain materials. Inventors may be able to share insights as to interesting outcomes that occurred and how the invention failed.

Are there differences between how the invention was originally conceived and how it has been put into practice?

Similar to problems encountered during development, this question may prompt inventors to discuss any unexpected outcomes that resulted in a design or strategy pivot during development.

We hope these questions will help you pursue IP protection that considers the full scope of an invention, whether in patent filings or as a negative trade secret.