January 12, 2018
Bryan K. Wheelock
Principal
St. Louis Metro Office
720 Recent Articles
January 10, 2018
Software Innovations Make Non-Abstract Improvements to Computer Technology
January 10, 2018
Patent Prosecution Word of the Day: “Infundibuliform”
January 08, 2018
Director’s Time-Bar Determinations under § 315(b) are not Exempt from Judicial Review
January 05, 2018
The Board Says that IPRs are Adjudicatory Proceedings — What will the Supreme Court Say?
January 05, 2018
About “About”: “Less Than About 3%” Includes 4%
January 02, 2018
No Regulations for Love and Vice Versa
December 29, 2017
Anticipation Analysis Indisputably Allows for Some Flexibility; Substantial Evidence Still Supports Finding of No Anticipation
December 26, 2017
If You Try to Hide Prosecution Conduct, Then the Court will Presume You Had Something to Hide
December 22, 2017
You Have Goat to be Kidding Me
December 22, 2017
Aqua Holds Water; Board’s Denial of Motion to Amend Vacated Because Board Improperly Put Burden on Patent Owner
December 20, 2017
Whether Third Party Acts are Attributable to Infringer in a Divided Infringement Situation is Question of Fact
December 20, 2017
Dear Santa … A Patent Law Wish List for 2018
December 18, 2017
Federal Circuit Affirms Board on Claim Construction, No Anticipation, and Nonobviousness
December 15, 2017
Immoral and Scandalous Matter are as Registrable as Disparaging Matter; The Principal Register is FUCT
December 14, 2017
No Need to be your Own Lexicographer
December 09, 2017
The Marking Requirement is Alive and Well; Don’t Forget about Virtual Marking
December 08, 2017
Patent Owner Has Burden to Prove Marking Once Infringer Identifies Unmarked Products
December 08, 2017
Copyright Claim from Out of the Blue
December 06, 2017