Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
G. Donald Harrison (1889–1956), builder of music organs; Walter de Havilland (1872–1968), father of film stars Olivia de Havilland and Joan Fontaine. Ralph Horween (1896–1997), Harvard Crimson and NFL football player; Gerald D. Hosier, patent litigator, named highest-paid attorney by Forbes magazine in 2000
Harvard College v. Canada (Commissioner of Patents): patent of higher lifeforms (CA, 2002) Honeywell v. Sperry Rand (US, 1973) Hotchkiss v. Greenwood (US, 1850) Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd v ZTE Corp. and ZTE Deutschland GmbH (European Court of Justice, C-170/13, 2015), judgement on standard-essential patents
Bilski v. Kappos, 561 U.S. 593 (2010), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States holding that the machine-or-transformation test is not the sole test for determining the patent eligibility of a process, but rather "a useful and important clue, an investigative tool, for determining whether some claimed inventions are processes under § 101."
The following is a list of celebrity inventors and their patents. (For the purposes of this article, an inventor is a person who has been granted a patent.)After Google released a patent search [1] online in December 2006, a website called Ironic Sans, [2] made the public aware of a number of celebrity patents found through the new patent search engine.
Ken Olsen, the MIT-educated inventor who started Digital Equipment Corp. with $70,000 in venture capital in the 1950s and built it into a company with billions of dollars in sales and more than ...
The patent rolls comprise a register of the letters patent issued by the Crown, and sealed "open" with the Great Seal pendent, expressing the sovereign's will on a wide range of matters of public interest, including – but not restricted to – grants of official positions, lands, commissions, privileges and pardons, issued both to individuals and to corporations.
The majority opinion by Chief Judge Paul Redmond Michel characterized the issue as whether the claimed method is a patent-eligible "process," as the patent statute (35 U.S.C. § 101) uses that term. While any series of actions or operations is a process in the dictionary sense of that term, the court explained, the Supreme Court has held that ...
The recommended use is the two-letter country code followed by the patent document number and then the kind code, e.g., "US 7,654,321 B1" for U.S. Patent No. 7,654,321 where there was no previously-published patent application publication, and "US 2003/1234567 A1" for U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2003/1234567, published in 2003. [1]