lawofficenevadahenderson-blog
Nevada Henderson Law Office
Bayramoglu Law office; Patent,Trademark and Immigration Lawyers
6 posts
Don't wanna be here? Send us removal request.
Last Seen Blogs
frothymcthundercunt
turn down 4 lunch
gasparsnoe
time destroys everything
ione-ioni-iony-blog
Ione McCall
leadthedway-blog
Lead the Dway
jeremynogueuniverse
Jeremy Nogue
Text
Another Great Win for Our Client
This case has a long and interesting history but ultimately we were successful in securing a patent for our client. This case started in 2013 when we filed this application. The case is titled
SOCIAL NETWORK BASED ON GPS AND OTHER NETWORK CONNECTIONS (Application No:13/895,430).
USPTO issued not one not two nut four different office actions rejecting claims under 35 USC Section 101 and Section 103. We advised our client to file an appeal to the Patent Trial & Appeal Board (PTAB). The board ultimately found our arguments persuasive and reverse the Examiner for both Section 101 and Section 103 rejections.
Following is the timeline for case:
-Non-final Rejection May 5,2015
-Final Rejection Aug 27, 2015
-After Final Consideration Program Decision Nov 12, 2015
-Request for Continued Examination Jan 27, 2016
-Non-final RCE May 19, 2016
-Final RCE Jul 29, 2016
-Appeal Brief Filed Nov 28, 2016
-Reply Brief Filed Jan 17, 2017
-Decision by TPAB Dec 18, 2018
We are happy and able to assist our clients and we are so glad that we were able to obtain a patent grant for our client to protect our client’s invention.
Another Great Win for Our Client
0 notes
Text
How to Protect Your Brand on Amazon
Brands that sell their products on Amazon face a variety of obstacles that impede their ability to market themselves efficiently. Frustrations range from being unable to make simple changes to listing details changed by typos or faulty information to needy or high maintenance sellers. Fortunately, Amazon has a solution to help protect your brand from these type of hassles.
Amazon Brand Registry has been around for a long time and it’s probably something you haven’t heard of before unless your saw a random treat from a friend who was ripped off on Amazon. The program exists to help brands protect their product listings and offer additional tools to optimize your listings for success. Currently, any brand with a registered trademark can enroll in Amazon Brand Registry.
How do I get started?
Enrolling in Amazon’s brand registry program is fairly simple. To begin the process, you’ll need to provide Amazon with the trademark registration number for your brand, a list of product categories, a brand website, a list of countries where your products are manufactured and distributed and images of your brand’s logo, product and packaging.
Can I get help?
Amazon makes it easy with a simple walk-through fillable form where you can easily fill out all this information. After you’re done, a verification code will be sent to the law office that filed your trademark. At this point, you’ll contact your attorney to retrieve the code and provide it to Amazon to finish the enrollment.
Brands that primarily work with a single seller inside the marketplace on Amazon to sell or distribute their wares can have their seller initiate the process on behalf of their brand. Control of brand registry can be relinquished at any time.
How Am I Protected?
The benefits of brand registry include product listing product listing from other sellers, the potential for increased conversion rate and sales and an overall improvement in your Amazon experience.
What other benefits are there?
If you have ever spent time on “Amazon Seller Central” updating a product listing, only to find that those updates aren’t showing up correctly, or were changed by another seller, knows the headache of opening a case with Amazon to fix the issue. Brand Registry can resolve this problem by prioritizing information from the registered brand above the crowd of other sellers on the listing.
This means that you have control of your product’s details and presentation on Amazon.
Additionally, registered brands have the ability to add “Enhanced Brand Content” to their listings. This offers more details to the consumer to review more information and details about the product they’re thinking about purchasing.
Not only does this added information please the eye, but we’ve also seen product conversion rates jump by 30% or more on product listings that feature the “Enhanced Brand Content”.
Is this right for me?
For sellers who struggle with prolonged ad approval times for their products, we’ve seen ads for brand registered products be approved within 24 hours. And don’t stress — adjustments can be made to ads without pausing the campaign, allowing sellers the flexibility they want.
Brand Registry is easy to set up and navigate for any seller wishing to improve their overall brand or experience with Amazon. In today’s ever changing, evolving marketplace where it’s easier than ever for other sellers to represent your brand inaccurately, Brand Registry offers protection and peace of mind.
Questions? Call us today for a free consultation, or email us at: in @bayramoglu-legal.com or deniz@ bayramoglu-legal.com
How to Protect Your Brand on Amazon
0 notes
Text
En banc CAFC: Patent applicant Not required to pay PTO attorney fees in District Court appeal
The Federal Circuit en banc affirmed a district court’s decision that a patent applicant who challenges an adverse decision of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) in court and loses, is not required to pay the PTO’s attorney’s fees. See NantKwest, Inc. v. Iancu, No. 2016-1794, 2018 (Fed. Cir. July 27, 2018) (Before Prost, C.J., Newman, Lourie, Dyk, Moore, O’Malley, Reyna, Wallach, Taranto, Hughes, and Stoll, J.) (Opinion for the court, Stoll, J., joined by Newman, Lourie, Moore, O’Malley, Wallach, and Taranto, J.) (Dissenting opinion, Prost, C.J., joined by Dyk, Reyna, and Hughes, J.)
NantKwest filed suit in district court under 35 U.S.C. § 145 to contest the PTO’s rejection of its patent application. The USPTO prevailed and filed a motion for reimbursement of all of its litigation expenses, including attorney’s fees. 35 U.S.C. § 145 requires that “all expenses of the proceeding be paid by the applicant,” which the USPTO claimed included their fees and costs.
The district court denied the PTO’s motion with respect to attorney’s fees. Under the “American Rule,” each party to a proceeding is generally required to pay their own attorney’s fees regardless of the outcome, which precluded the PTO from recovering fees. The PTO appealed to the Federal Circuit, where a split panel reversed the district court. The panel found that the “all expenses” language of 35 U.S.C. § 145 allowed the PTO to recover attorney’s fees, despite the American Rule. The Federal Circuit then voted sua sponte to hear the appeal en banc and vacated the panel’s judgment.
In the en banc proceeding, the Federal Circuit found Supreme Court precedent mandated that the American Rule must be applied as a starting point when determining whether attorney’s fees should be shifted between parties. While Congress can create fee-shifting statutes, 35 U.S.C. § 145 did not reflect explicit congressional authorization for fee-shifting that would displace the American Rule. The Court examined the historical meaning of “expenses” in Section 145, and well as modern definitions, and found that “expenses” generally did not include attorney’s fees. The Court also considered a body of case law wherein expenses and attorney’s fees were two separate categories of reimbursements and compared Section 145 with language in other areas of the Patent Act, such as 35 U.S.C. § 285, where “attorney’s fees” language was explicitly included for recovery purposes. Ultimately, the PTO could not recover attorney’s fees as the prevailing party under Section 145 and the Court affirmed the district court’s denial of the PTO’s motion for attorney’s fees.
En banc CAFC: Patent applicant Not required to pay PTO attorney fees in District Court appeal
0 notes
Text
USCIS Policy Manual Update: Medical Exams Now Valid For Two Years
USCIS is revising policy guidance for the validity period of Form I-693, Report of Medical Examination and Vaccination Record.
The updated policy, which goes into effect on Nov. 1, 2018, will require applicants to submit a Form I-693 that is signed by a civil surgeon no more than 60 days before filing the underlying application for an immigration benefit. The Form I-693 would remain valid for a two-year period following the date the civil surgeon signed it. As such, USCIS is retaining the current maximum two-year validity period of Form I-693, but calculating it in a different manner to both enhance operational efficiencies and reduce the number of requests to applicants for an updated Form I-693.
USCIS officers use Form I-693, Report of Medical Examination and Vaccination Record, to determine whether an applicant for an immigration benefit in the United States is inadmissible under the health-related grounds of inadmissibility. By specifying that the Form I-693 must be signed no more than 60 days before the applicant files the underlying application for which Form I-693 is required, the validity of the form is more closely tied to the timing of the underlying application.
Additionally, requiring submission of a Form I-693 that was signed no more than 60 days before the date the underlying application was filed may, in some cases, maximize the period of time Form I-693 will be valid while the underlying application is under USCIS review. Officers will still have the discretion, as they have always had, to request a new Form I-693 if they have reason to believe an applicant may be inadmissible on the health-related grounds. Delays in adjudicating the underlying application will also be reduced if fewer requests for updated Forms I-693 are necessary.
USCIS Policy Manual Update: Medical Exams Now Valid For Two Years
0 notes
Text
Had a great time at the Governor’s Conference on Business 2018.
Conference on Business 2018.
We love our local clients, and it was a pleasure spending time with Nevada Governor Brian Sandoval.
Had a great time at the Governor’s Conference on Business 2018.
0 notes
Text
USCIS Is Now Using Digital Tablets to Administer The English Reading and Writing Tests During Naturalization Interviews
On Oct. 1, USCIS began using digital tablets to administer the English reading and writing tests during naturalization interviews as part of the agency’s ongoing modernization efforts. Although USCIS applicants already use digital tablets to sign or verify parts of their applications, this new approach expands the use of tablets, allowing the device to be used for a greater amount of the application process. USCIS will be able to carry on in using the paper process on a case-by-case basis.
Although the eligibility requirements and the subject material of the naturalization test have not changed, applicants are now using a stylus on a digital tablet in place of a paper application. Immigration Services Officers (ISO) will carefully instruct applicants on how to use the tablets before giving the tests:
For the reading test, a sentence will appear on the tablet and the ISO will ask the applicant to read it.
For the writing test, several lines will appear on the tablet, replicating the appearance of a piece of blank paper. The ISO will read a sentence aloud and ask the applicant to write it on the tablet.
Applicants will continue to take the civics test verbally, without the tablet.
USCIS Is Now Using Digital Tablets to Administer The English Reading and Writing Tests During Naturalization Interviews
0 notes