Juristat is proud to announce the release of some exciting new features that will help law firms compare performance and attract new business. Here’s a breakdown of what to expect:

Latest release will help firms compare performance and attract new clients

ST. LOUIS, MO – September 1, 2015 – Juristat, the legal technology company known for its industry-leading Patent Examiner Reports, today announced the release of a new suite of products that will help law firms compare performance and attract new business.

Introduction

We are constantly thinking about all the factors that affect a patent application. We’ve even analyzed gender bias at the USPTO (check back soon for those results). Every detail matters, perhaps even the length of an application’s title. That’s why we decided to test the following hypothesis: a longer application title results in a longer wait until first exam.

Authored by Michael Vosseller

Authored by Michael Vosseller

Here at Juristat, we are often asked whether an entity's size affects its allowance rate for patents. We’ve run the numbers, and the results may be more skewed than you expect.

The USPTO has issued new guidance on subject matter eligibility under § 101. The document, entitled “2014 Interim Guidance on Patent Subject Matter Eligibility” (Interim Eligibility Guidance), comes in the wake of the recent Supreme Court decisions in Mayo, Myriad, and Alice Corp. that have shaken up the way patent examiners determine if an idea is patentable. Prior to the Interim Eligibility Guidance's release on December 15th, patent examiners relied primarily on two documents released earlier this year: (1) the Myriad/Mayo guidance issued on March 4th; and (2) the Alice Corp. guidance issued on June 25th. The new document supplements the latter and supersedes the former.

SAWS. If you think it sounds ominous, you’re not the first. Alyssa Bereznak at Yahoo Tech recently broke the story on this shadowy USPTO system.

Friday May 23, 2014