Search the RE article base
Contact Information
Twitter
My TweetsUseful Web Sites
Tag Archives: (f)(2)
Another Question on RE: Does a subject invention have to be enabling?
A new question showed up in the RE search queue: “does a subject invention have to be enabling?” How to unwind this one? We can try. Another way to put it might be, “when does something new–an idea, an insight, … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole
Tagged (f)(2), 35 USC 201(e), 35 USC 202(c)(1), 37 CFR 401.14(c)(1), disclosure, enablement, subject invention
Comments Off on Another Question on RE: Does a subject invention have to be enabling?
Bayh-Dole support for inventors and free competition
I made this a twitter thread. I’ll post it here as well and work to round it out as I have time. It’s the flip side of being blunt about what happens under Bayh-Dole if an inventor does not assign … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole
Tagged (f)(2), 35 USC 202(a), 35 USC 202(c)(7)(A), 401.9, Bayh-Dole, charade
Comments Off on Bayh-Dole support for inventors and free competition
Being blunt about Bayh-Dole operations, 2
Under Bayh-Dole, a federal contractor has no special right, and no obligation, to take ownership of inventions arising in federally supported research or development. There is nothing, absolutely nothing, in Bayh-Dole that suggests that Congress had any intention to make … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, History
Tagged (f)(2), Bayh-Dole, FPR, IPA, reasonable interpretation, written agreement
Comments Off on Being blunt about Bayh-Dole operations, 2
9 things Bayh-Dole does not require universities to do, part 3
We have worked through nine things Bayh-Dole does not require. Let’s come back around and work through in detail the disclosure requirement that Bayh-Dole does not require. Bayh-Dole has a disclosure requirement that is to be placed in the default … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole
Tagged (f)(2), Bayh-Dole, written agreement
Comments Off on 9 things Bayh-Dole does not require universities to do, part 3
Reagan’s Executive Order 12591-4
In the implementation of Bayh-Dole, then, employee-inventors own unless they assign rights, such as to an institutional Contractor. We can use “Contractor” with a capital “C” to follow the usage in the Federal Procurement Regulation’s patent rights clause that implements … Continue reading
Bayh-Dole’s “subject invention” botch of the Federal Procurement Regulations, 3
A careful read of Bayh-Dole and its omission of the patent agreement requirement argues not only did Bayh-Dole reverse the “presumption” of federal ownership of inventions made under contract but also repudiated the federal requirement that contractors own inventions so … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, Bozonet
Tagged (f)(2), 37 CFR 401.9, Bayh-Dole, FPR, SPRC, work of clowns
Comments Off on Bayh-Dole’s “subject invention” botch of the Federal Procurement Regulations, 3
Patent agreements in Federal Procurement Regulations and Bayh-Dole, 1
Sean O’Connor starts an excellent article that gives a detailed account of history behind the Bayh-Dole Act (“Mistaken Assumptions: the Roots of Stanford v. Roche in Post-War Government Patent Policy“) this way: The Bayh-Dole Act of 1980 was built on a … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, History
Tagged (f)(2), Bayh-Dole, Federal Procurement Regulations, mistaken assumption, patent agreement, written agreement
Comments Off on Patent agreements in Federal Procurement Regulations and Bayh-Dole, 1
Bayh-Dole’s Ruby Slippers
This is a story about 35 USC 201(b), 35 USC 202(a), 37 CFR 401.9, and 37 CFR 401.14(f)(2) and (g)(1). These provisions of Bayh-Dole, implementing regulations, and standard patent rights clause, when read together, create ruby slippers. [I’ve revised the … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole
Tagged (f)(2), 35 USC 202(a), Bayh-Dole, contractor, ruby slippers, subject invention
Comments Off on Bayh-Dole’s Ruby Slippers
More Impractical Advice About NIST’s Changes to Bayh-Dole’s Regulations
NIST–can’t live with them, but law firms sure can. Here’s another law firm popping off about NIST’s recent revisions to Bayh-Dole’s implementing regulations and standard patent rights clause. Keep in mind that NIST’s chief counsel is already on record not … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, Bozonet, Stanford v Roche
Tagged (f)(2), Bayh-Dole, clueless, garble, impractical advice, NIST, present assignment, ridiculous
Comments Off on More Impractical Advice About NIST’s Changes to Bayh-Dole’s Regulations
Mapping Bayh-Dole Flow of Control
I have updated this article from June 24, 2011 in light of the Stanford v Roche decision. In its previous version, the article sets out the idea that a federal agency has a right to claim title to inventions made … Continue reading
Posted in Bayh-Dole, Sponsored Research
Tagged (f)(2), 37 CFR 401.9, Bayh-Dole, flow of control, SPRC
Comments Off on Mapping Bayh-Dole Flow of Control