Podcasts about uspto

What happens when the USPTO lets artificial intelligence join the patent process? In this episode, I breaks down the brand-new Automated Search Pilot Program, a six-month experiment where AI runs a pre-exam prior art search before a human examiner even touches your application. I explains what it is, how to join, who it helps (and who it doesn't), and why it might just change the way patents get examined, all with some healthy skepticism about letting robots near our inventions.   Connect with Adam Diament E-mail: adiament@nolanheimann.com   Website: https://www.nolanheimann.com/legal-team/adam-diament   Phone/Text: (424)281-0162   YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC5cTADZzJfPoyQMjnW-rtRw   Instagram:  https://www.instagram.com/trademarkpatentlaw/   LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/adam-diament-j-d-ph-d-180a005/   Amazon Book Page: https://www.amazon.com/stores/author/B005SV2RZC/allbooks?ingress=0&visitId=831aff71-513b-4158-ad73-386ede491e93  

In this episode of The Digital Executive, host Brian Thomas sits down with Austin Bonderer, a seasoned patent attorney with over 25 years of experience and more than 700 issued U.S. patents to his name. From his early days as a U.S. Patent Examiner to leading nanotechnology prosecutions for a Forbes Global 100 company, Austin brings unmatched insight into the world of intellectual property and innovation.He shares what working inside the USPTO taught him about the human side of patent law—why building relationships with examiners is just as important as crafting airtight technical arguments. Austin also explains how technology and smart software tools have revolutionized the patent process, keeping quality high even with massive caseloads.For startups, he offers practical advice on avoiding common IP missteps—like premature disclosure and underestimating the power of NDAs and internal SOPs to protect company assets. Austin also tackles one of the field's toughest challenges: how the 2014 Supreme Court's Alice decision disrupted software and diagnostic patents, leaving innovators in legal limbo.Finally, he dives into the complexities of AI-generated inventions, warning that using AI tools in the creative process may unintentionally trigger public disclosure risks under current law.With decades of experience at the intersection of technology, law, and innovation, Austin Bonderer provides a masterclass in how to protect ideas in an era where the rules are still being written. If you liked what you heard today, please leave us a review - Apple or Spotify. See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

My fellow pro-growth/progress/abundance Up Wingers,For most of history, stagnation — not growth — was the rule. To explain why prosperity so often stalls, economist Carl Benedikt Frey offers a sweeping tour through a millennium of innovation and upheaval, showing how societies either harness — or are undone by — waves of technological change. His message is sobering: an AI revolution is no guarantee of a new age of progress.Today on Faster, Please! — The Podcast, I talk with Frey about why societies midjudge their trajectory and what it takes to reignite lasting growth.Frey is a professor of AI and Work at the Oxford Internet Institute and a fellow of Mansfield College, University of Oxford. He is the director of the Future of Work Programme and Oxford Martin Citi Fellow at the Oxford Martin School.He is the author of several books, including the brand new one, How Progress Ends: Technology, Innovation, and the Fate of Nations.In This Episode* The end of progress? (1:28)* A history of Chinese innovation (8:26)* Global competitive intensity (11:41)* Competitive problems in the US (15:50)* Lagging European progress (22:19)* AI & labor (25:46)Below is a lightly edited transcript of our conversation. The end of progress? (1:28). . . once you exploit a technology, the processes that aid that run into diminishing returns, you have a lot of incumbents, you have some vested interests around established technologies, and you need something new to revive growth.Pethokoukis: Since 2020, we've seen the emergence of generative AI, mRNA vaccines, reusable rockets that have returned America to space, we're seeing this ongoing nuclear renaissance including advanced technologies, maybe even fusion, geothermal, the expansion of solar — there seems to be a lot cooking. Is worrying about the end of progress a bit too preemptive?Frey: Well in a way, it's always a bit too preemptive to worry about the future: You don't know what's going to come. But let me put it this way: If you had told me back in 1995 — and if I was a little bit older then — that computers and the internet would lead to a decade streak of productivity growth and then peter out, I would probably have thought you nuts because it's hard to think about anything that is more consequential. Computers have essentially given people the world's store of knowledge basically in their pockets. The internet has enabled us to connect inventors and scientists around the world. There are few tools that aided the research process more. There should hardly be any technology that has done more to boost scientific discovery, and yet we don't see it.We don't see it in the aggregate productivity statistics, so that petered out after a decade. Research productivity is in decline. Measures of breakthrough innovation is in decline. So it's always good to be optimistic, I guess, and I agree with you that, when you say AI and when you read about many of the things that are happening now, it's very, very exciting, but I remain somewhat skeptical that we are actually going to see that leading to a huge revival of economic growth.I would just be surprised if we don't see any upsurge at all, to be clear, but we do have global productivity stagnation right now. It's not just Europe, it's not just Britain. The US is not doing too well either over the past two decades or so. China's productivity is probably in the negative territory or stagnant, by more optimistic measures, and so we're having a growth problem.If tech progress were inevitable, why have predictions from the '90s, and certainly earlier decades like the '50s and '60s, about transformative breakthroughs and really fast economic growth by now, consistently failed to materialize? How does your thesis account for why those visions of rapid growth and progress have fallen short?I'm not sure if my thesis explains why those expectations didn't materialize, but I'm hopeful that I do provide some framework for thinking about why we've often seen historically rapid growth spurts followed by stagnation and even decline. The story I'm telling is not rocket science, exactly. It's basically built on the simple intuitions that once you exploit a technology, the processes that aid that run into diminishing returns, you have a lot of incumbents, you have some vested interests around established technologies, and you need something new to revive growth.So for example, the Soviet Union actually did reasonably well in terms of economic growth. A lot of it, or most of it, was centered on heavy industry, I should say. So people didn't necessarily see the benefits in their pockets, but the economy grew rapidly for about four decades or so, then growth petered out, and eventually it collapsed. So for exploiting mass-production technologies, the Soviet system worked reasonably well. Soviet bureaucrats could hold factory managers accountable by benchmarking performance across factories.But that became much harder when something new was needed because when something is new, what's the benchmark? How do you benchmark against that? And more broadly, when something is new, you need to explore, and you need to explore often different technological trajectories. So in the Soviet system, if you were an aircraft engineer and you wanted to develop your prototype, you could go to the red arm and ask for funding. If they turned you down, you maybe had two or three other options. If they turned you down, your idea would die with you.Conversely, in the US back in '99, Bessemer Venture declined to invest in Google, which seemed like a bad idea with the benefit of hindsight, but it also illustrates that Google was no safe bet at the time. Yahoo and Alta Vista we're dominating search. You need somebody to invest in order to know if something is going to catch on, and in a more decentralized system, you can have more people taking different bets and you can explore more technological trajectories. That is one of the reasons why the US ended up leading the computer revolutions to which Soviet contributions were basically none.Going back to your question, why didn't those dreams materialize? I think we've made it harder to explore. Part of the reason is protective regulation. Part of the reason is lobbying by incumbents. Part of the reason is, I think, a revolving door between institutions like the US patent office and incumbents where we see in the data that examiners tend to grant large firms some patents that are of low quality and then get lucrative jobs at those places. That's creating barriers to entry. That's not good for new startups and inventors entering the marketplace. I think that is one of the reasons that we haven't seen some of those dreams materialize.A history of Chinese innovation (8:26)So while Chinese bureaucracy enabled scale, Chinese bureaucracy did not really permit much in terms of decentralized exploration, which European fragmentation aided . . .I wonder if your analysis of pre-industrial China, if there's any lessons you can draw about modern China as far as the way in which bad governance can undermine innovation and progress?Pre-industrial China has a long history. China was the technology leader during the Song and Tang dynasties. It had a meritocratic civil service. It was building infrastructure on scales that were unimaginable in Europe at the time, and yet it didn't have an industrial revolution. So while Chinese bureaucracy enabled scale, Chinese bureaucracy did not really permit much in terms of decentralized exploration, which European fragmentation aided, and because there was lots of social status attached to becoming a bureaucrat and passing the civil service examination, if Galileo was born in China, he would probably become a bureaucrat rather than a scientist, and I think that's part of the reason too.But China mostly did well when the state was strong rather than weak. A strong state was underpinned by intensive political competition, and once China had unified and there were fewer peer competitors, you see that the center begins to fade. They struggle to tax local elites in order to keep the peace. People begin to erect monopolies in their local markets and collide with guilds to protect production and their crafts from competition.So during the Qing dynasty, China begins to decline, whereas we see the opposite happening in Europe. European fragmentation aids exploration and innovation, but it doesn't necessarily aid scaling, and so that is something that Europe needs to come to terms with at a later stage when the industrial revolution starts to take off. And even before that, market integration played an important role in terms of undermining the guilds in Europe, and so part of the reason why the guilds persist longer in China is the distance is so much longer between cities and so the guilds are less exposed to competition. In the end, Europe ends up overtaking China, in large part because vested interests are undercut by governments, but also because of investments in things that spur market integration.Global competitive intensity (11:41)Back in the 2000s, people predicted that China would become more like the United States, now it looks like the United States is becoming more like China.This is a great McKinsey kind of way of looking at the world: The notion that what drives innovation is sort of maximum competitive intensity. You were talking about the competitive intensity in both Europe and in China when it was not so centralized. You were talking about the competitive intensity of a fragmented Europe.Do you think that the current level of competitive intensity between the United States and China —and I really wish I could add Europe in there. Plenty of white papers, I know, have been written about Europe's competitive state and its in innovativeness, and I hope those white papers are helpful and someone reads them, but it seems to be that the real competition is between United States and China.Do you not think that that competitive intensity will sort of keep those countries progressing despite any of the barriers that might pop up and that you've already mentioned a little bit? Isn't that a more powerful tailwind than any of the headwinds that you've mentioned?It could be, I think, if people learn the right lessons from history, at least that's a key argument of the book. Right now, what I'm seeing is the United States moving more towards protectionist with protective tariffs. Right now, what I see is a move towards, we could even say crony capitalism with tariff exemptions that some larger firms that are better-connected to the president are able to navigate, but certainly not challengers. You're seeing the United States embracing things like golden shares in Intel, and perhaps even extending that to a range of companies. Back in the 2000s, people predicted that China would become more like the United States, now it looks like the United States is becoming more like China.And China today is having similar problems and on, I would argue, an even greater scale. Growth used to be the key objective in China, and so for local governments, provincial governments competing on such targets, it was fairly easy to benchmark and measure and hold provincial governors accountable, and they would be promoted inside the Communist Party based on meeting growth targets. Now, we have prioritized common prosperity, more national security-oriented concerns.And so in China, most progress has been driven by private firms and foreign-invested firms. State-owned enterprise has generally been a drag on innovation and productivity. What you're seeing, though, as China is shifting more towards political objectives, it's harder to mobilize private enterprise, where the yard sticks are market share and profitability, for political goals. That means that China is increasingly relying more again on state-owned enterprises, which, again, have been a drag on innovation.So, in principle, I agree with you that historically you did see Russian defeat to Napoleon leading to this Stein-Hardenberg Reforms, and the abolishment of Gilded restrictions, and a more competitive marketplace for both goods and ideas. You saw that Russian losses in the Crimean War led to the of abolition of serfdom, and so there are many times in history where defeat, in particular, led to striking reforms, but right now, the competition itself doesn't seem to lead to the kinds of reforms I would've hoped to see in response.Competitive problems in the US (15:50)I think what antitrust does is, at the very least, it provides a tool that means that businesses are thinking twice before engaging in anti-competitive behavior.I certainly wrote enough pieces and talked to enough people over the past decade who have been worried about competition in the United States, and the story went something like this: that you had these big tech companies — Google, and Meta, Facebook and Microsoft — that these were companies were what they would call “forever companies,” that they had such dominance in their core businesses, and they were throwing off so much cash that these were unbeatable companies, and this was going to be bad for America. People who made that argument just could not imagine how any other companies could threaten their dominance. And yet, at the time, I pointed out that it seemed to me that these companies were constantly in fear that they were one technological advance from being in trouble.And then lo and behold, that's exactly what happened. And while in AI, certainly, Google's super important, and Meta Facebook are super important, so are OpenAI, and so is Anthropic, and there are other companies.So the point here, after my little soliloquy, is can we overstate these problems, at least in the United States, when it seems like it is still possible to create a new technology that breaks the apparent stranglehold of these incumbents? Google search does not look quite as solid a business as it did in 2022.Can we overstate the competitive problems of the United States, or is what you're saying more forward-looking, that perhaps we overstated the competitive problems in the past, but now, due to these tariffs, and executives having to travel to the White House and give the president gifts, that that creates a stage for the kind of competitive problems that we should really worry about?I'm very happy to support the notion that technological changes can lead to unpredictable outcomes that incumbents may struggle to predict and respond to. Even if they predict it, they struggle to act upon it because doing so often undermines the existing business model.So if you take Google, where the transformer was actually conceived, the seven people behind it, I think, have since left the company. One of the reasons that they probably didn't launch anything like ChatGPT was probably for the fear of cannibalizing search. So I think the most important mechanisms for dislodging incumbents are dramatic shifts in technology.None of the legacy media companies ended up leading social media. None of the legacy retailers ended up leading e-commerce. None of the automobile leaders are leading in EVs. None of the bicycle companies, which all went into automobile, so many of them, ended up leading. So there is a pattern there.At the same time, I think you do have to worry that there are anti-competitive practices going on that makes it harder, and that are costly. The revolving door between the USPTO and companies is one example of that. We also have a reasonable amount of evidence on killer acquisitions whereby firms buy up a competitor just to shut it down. Those things are happening. I think you need to have tools that allow you to combat that, and I think more broadly, the United States has a long history of fairly vigorous antitrust policy. I think it'd be a hard pressed to suggest that that has been a tremendous drag on American business or American dynamism. So if you don't think, for example, that American antitrust policy has contributed to innovation and dynamism, at the very least, you can't really say either that it's been a huge drag on it.In Japan, for example, in its postwar history, antitrust was extremely lax. In the United States, it was very vigorous, and it was very vigorous throughout the computer revolution as well, which it wasn't at all in Japan. If you take the lawsuit against IBM, for example, you can debate this. To what extent did it force it to unbundle hardware and software, and would Microsoft been the company it is today without that? I think AT&T, it's both the breakup and it's deregulation, as well, but I think by basically all accounts, that was a good idea, particularly at the time when the National Science Foundation released ARPANET into the world.I think what antitrust does is, at the very least, it provides a tool that means that businesses are thinking twice before engaging in anti-competitive behavior. There's always a risk of antitrust being heavily politicized, and that's always been a bad idea, but at the same time, I think having tools on the books that allows you to check monopolies and steer their investments more towards the innovation rather than anti-competitive practices, I think is, broadly speaking, a good thing. I think in the European Union, you often hear that competition policy is a drag on productivity. I think it's the least of Europe's problem.Lagging European progress (22:19)If you take the postwar period, at least Europe catches up in most key industries, and actually lead in some of them. . . but doesn't do the same in digital. The question in my mind is: Why is that?Let's talk about Europe as we sort of finish up. We don't have to write How Progress Ends, it seems like progress has ended, so maybe we want to think about how progress restarts, and is the problem in Europe, is it institutions or is it the revealed preference of Europeans, that they're getting what they want? That they don't value progress and dynamism, that it is a cultural preference that is manifested in institutions? And if that's the case — you can tell me if that's not the case, I kind of feel like it might be the case — how do you restart progress in Europe since it seems to have already ended?The most puzzling thing to me is not that Europe is less dynamic than the United States — that's not very puzzling at all — but that it hasn't even managed to catch up in digital. If you take the postwar period, at least Europe catches up in most key industries, and actually lead in some of them. So in a way, take automobiles, electrical machinery, chemicals, pharmaceuticals, nobody would say that Europe is behind in those industries, or at least not for long. Europe has very robust catchup growth in the post-war period, but doesn't do the same in digital. The question in my mind is: Why is that?I think part of the reason is that the returns to innovation, the returns to scaling in Europe are relatively muted by a fragmented market in services, in particular. The IMF estimates that if you take all trade barriers on services inside the European Union and you add them up, it's something like 110 percent tariffs. Trump Liberation Day tariffs, essentially, imposed within European Union. That means that European firms in digital and in services don't have a harmonized market to scale into, the way the United States and China has. I think that's by far the biggest reason.On top of that, there are well-intentioned regulations like the GDPR that, by any account, has been a drag on innovation, and particularly been harmful for startups, whereas larger firms that find it easier to manage compliance costs have essentially managed to offset those costs by capturing a larger share of the market. I think the AI Act is going in the same direction there, ad so you have more hurdles, you have greater costs of innovating because of those regulatory barriers. And then the return to innovation is more capped by having a smaller, fragmented market.I don't think that culture or European lust for leisure rather than work is the key reason. I think there's some of that, but if you look at the most dynamic places in Europe, it tends to be the Scandinavian countries and, being from Sweden myself, I can tell you that most people you will encounter there are not workaholics.AI & labor (25:46)I think AI at the moment has a real resilience problem. It's very good that things where there's a lot of precedent, it doesn't do very well where precedence is thin.As I finish up, let me ask you: Like a lot of economists who think about technology, you've thought about how AI will affect jobs — given what we've seen in the past few years, would it be your guess that, if we were to look at the labor force participation rates of the United States and other rich countries 10 years from now, that we will look at those employment numbers and think, “Wow, we can really see the impact of AI on those numbers”? Will it be extraordinarily evident, or would it be not as much?Unless there's very significant progress in AI, I don't think so. I think AI at the moment has a real resilience problem. It's very good that things where there's a lot of precedent, it doesn't do very well where precedence is thin. So in most activities where the world is changing, and the world is changing every day, you can't really rely on AI to reliably do work for you.An example of that, most people know of AlphaGo beating the world champion back in 2016. Few people will know that, back in 2023, human amateurs, using standard laptops, exposing the best Go programs to new positions that they would not have encountered in training, actually beat the best Go programs quite easily. So even in a domain where basically the problem is solved, where we already achieved super-human intelligence, you cannot really know how well these tools perform when circumstances change, and I think that that's really a problem. So unless we solve that, I don't think it's going to have an impact that will mean that labor force participation is going to be significantly lower 10 years from now.That said, I do think it's going to have a very significant impact on white collar work, and people's income and sense of status. I think of generative AI, in particular, as a tool that reduces barriers to entry in professional services. I often compare it to what happened with Uber and taxi services. With the arrival of GPS technology, knowing the name of every street in New York City was no longer a particularly valuable skill, and then with a platform matching supply and demand, anybody could essentially get into their car who has a driver's license and top up their incomes on the side. As a result of that, incumbent drivers faced more competition, they took a pay cut of around 10 percent.Obviously, a key difference with professional services is that they're traded. So I think it's very likely that, as generative AI reduces the productivity differential between people in, let's say the US and the Philippines in financial modeling, in paralegal work, in accounting, in a host of professional services, more of those activities will shift abroad, and I think many knowledge workers that had envisioned prosperous careers may feel a sense of loss of status and income as a consequence, and I do think that's quite significant.On sale everywhere The Conservative Futurist: How To Create the Sci-Fi World We Were PromisedFaster, Please! is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit fasterplease.substack.com/subscribe

On today's episode of the podcast we're analyzing our Not AVG Law trademark data, the trademark process, and what it's like to file a trademark when you work with us. Not AVG Law started filing trademarks in early Spring 2023. I have a law school degree and a Master's in Tax Law, but when I started my business I was teaching myself additional areas of law that I hadn't taken courses on in law school because I started out focused on health law. Trademarks was not a specialty when I started my business so around 2019 I started referring clients to a trademark attorney I knew, only to find out she'd started ghosting clients and later had issues with her state's bar association for signing contracts, taking money and not completing the work. I started referring clients to another attorney was wonderful, but I decided I could and should do this on my own. I was leaving revenue on the table and a lot of our clients needed this. In 2023 I took a $3,000 program on trademarks, got coaching from an experienced trademark attorney, and I started taking on clients. A few months into that I came up with the idea of Trademark Quickies, a search report we run that gives us the info to say "This mark looks worth pursuing," or "This mark looks like it'd be very tough to file." Book your Trademark Quickie at notavglaw.com/trademarks The Quickie idea stemmed from the fact that I pay for a single day license of a sophisticated attorney software to run trademark search reports for clients and I wanted to offset the cost while also helping people be able to start their trademark search before they pay us for the entire filing service and then have us search. So I'd open the search once a month and fill it from the waitlist I had up on our site that people could add their name to at any time. Today, you can book them at any time without a waitlist. Since starting in 2023, I've booked 191 Trademark Quickie searches and run 280 (the discrepancy being a BOGO search promo and the searches that are included for our 1-on-1 monthly clients. The Trademark Quickie Search service has proven to be beneficial not just for clients, but at $100 it's a comfortable price point to get started on your trademark without being something that just sounds fun, they're buying from a place of interest in possibly filing a trademark. Trademark Quickies by the Numbers:Searches Booked: 191Quickie Search Revenue: $15,100 Trademark Filing Revenue generated: $103,760 The Trademark Filing Process: 1. Book a Trademark Quickie Search. You'll receive two reports - one with all the details from the software that pulls any trademarks that could be confusingly similar along with our report summary and determination with a green, yellow, orange or red flag on the likelihood of filing success. Of our 280 searches, 171 have gotten green flags, 87 have gotten yellow, 17 have gotten orange flags and 5 have gotten red flags meaning 92% of these trademarks have been worth pursuing. 2. Apply for a trademark. If your search resulted in anything other than red, you have the option to work with us to file your trademark, and we do offer a discount to our Quickie Searchers who book their filing within a week of their Quickie results. Of the 280 Quickie searches, we've booked 97 trademarks (a 35% conversion rate) 3. Wait. Once your trademark is filed it can an examiner from the USPTO 8-12 months to review your application. If they see any issues, they'll give an office action. We're still waiting on results for many of those 97 filings, but of the ones we've filed and heard on, we've only had 5 or 6 "denied" meaning the USPTO said there is a confusingly similar trademark and you can pursue an argument if you choose to. Of these 5, only one was a green flag (I was newer to offering this service), 3 yellow flags, and one orange flag. This gives us a 98% filing success rate on green flags and 91% on yellow flags which is where I want it to be so the flag system is working appropriately. Tracking this data has helped me give better filing odds to our clients.

Tech transfer has long been a critical but often overlooked part of the intellectual property system. For decades, the Bayh-Dole Act has guided how federally funded research moves from university labs into the marketplace. The system has generated hundreds of thousands of inventions and startups — and, as Laura Peter notes, led to nearly $2 trillion in economic growth through tech transfer. While widely regarded as a success, new march-in rights and “patent revenue sharing” proposals from policymakers seek to change that.In this episode of the Clause 8 Podcast, Eli spoke with Laura Peter, former Deputy Director of the USPTO in the first Trump administration and current Executive Director of Research Commercialization and Partnerships at UNC Charlotte. With experience in Silicon Valley, government, and academia, Laura brings a unique perspective to the challenges and opportunities facing tech transfer today.They cover:* How Laura first met Andrei Iancu — and how that led to her appointment as Deputy Director when he was chosen as the Director of the USPTO.* Lessons learned working in the first Trump administration about what to expect on the IP policy front this time around.* The distinct role patents play for startups versus large companies.* The lasting impact of the Bayh-Dole Act and how it reshaped tech transfer.* How funding cuts, private investment pressures, and PTAB swings are affecting university research.* Laura's observation that proposals from the last administration to seize IP rights to lower drug prices haven't been rescinded — and what that could mean for future policy.Why it mattersThe Bayh-Dole framework has been a cornerstone of U.S. innovation for more than forty years. Changes to how federally funded research is commercialized — whether through funding cuts, new government claims on patents, or expanded march-in rights — could redefine the balance between universities, startups, and industry. Laura's perspective highlights not only the risks and opportunities, but also how unresolved policy proposals on government seizure of IP could reshape future debates.

This Day in Legal History: Lord Haw-Haw SentencedOn September 19, 1945, William Joyce—infamously known as “Lord Haw-Haw”—was sentenced to death by a British court for high treason. Joyce had gained notoriety during World War II for broadcasting Nazi propaganda over German radio to British audiences, aiming to demoralize Allied troops and civilians. Born in Brooklyn, New York, and raised in the UK and Ireland, Joyce later became a naturalized German citizen and an enthusiastic supporter of Hitler. His broadcasts, delivered in a nasal, sneering voice, opened with the phrase “Germany calling,” and earned him the derisive nickname "Lord Haw-Haw" from British listeners.After the war, Joyce was captured by British forces in Germany and brought back to the UK to stand trial. Despite his German citizenship, the court ruled that he had committed treason because he had held a British passport when he began working for the Nazis. His legal defense argued that he owed no allegiance to Britain at the time of the broadcasts, but the court held that possession of the passport created a duty of allegiance. The case raised significant questions about the limits of national loyalty and the reach of British treason laws.On January 6, 1946, Joyce was executed by hanging at Wandsworth Prison, becoming one of the last people to be executed for treason in the UK. The trial and execution were controversial, with some legal scholars and public commentators questioning the soundness of the court's interpretation of allegiance. Nevertheless, the sentence was seen by many at the time as a necessary response to one of the most prominent domestic collaborators of the war.The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), long considered a cost-effective and critical pillar of U.S. workplace safety, has been effectively dismantled under the Trump administration's 2025 restructuring efforts. The agency, a division of the CDC responsible for certifying N95 masks, studying firefighter deaths, and leading occupational health research, saw roughly 90% of its 1,000 staff receive layoff notices on April 1. This move paralyzed core programs, from black lung screenings to PPE certifications, halting NIOSH's role as both a public safeguard and a quiet corporate consultant. The sudden cuts sparked chaos: lab animals were euthanized, crucial research was frozen, and businesses warned of safety gaps and market instability.Many affected workers have since resigned or are stuck on administrative leave, while others remain in limbo as lawsuits challenge the legality of the terminations. Despite statements from HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. claiming essential functions remain intact, internal confusion and partial walk-backs—like budget proposals still seeking to slash 80% of NIOSH funding—suggest deeper dismantling intentions. Business leaders, labor unions, and safety advocates have united in rare bipartisan pushback, warning of long-term risks to both worker health and industrial standards.The agency's downfall is part of a broader campaign to weaken the federal workforce, spearheaded by Project 2025 architects and executed with sweeping firings, anti-DEI mandates, and deep budget cuts across agencies. Former government scientists describe the collapse of safety infrastructure as a slow, invisible crisis—where the full damage may not emerge for years. With morale shattered and talent fleeing, the future of U.S. workplace safety research is in jeopardy.Trump Team Derailed Corporate America's Most Valuable ConsultantTwo major elements of President Donald Trump's economic agenda—his global tariffs and his attempt to remove Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook—are now in the hands of the U.S. Supreme Court, raising pivotal questions about the scope of presidential power. The court has agreed to hear a challenge to Trump's use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose sweeping tariffs, a law traditionally used to sanction hostile foreign actors, not manage trade. Arguments are set for November 5. Separately, Trump is seeking to fire Cook, claiming misconduct; however, critics argue this is a pretext for targeting her policy views and that doing so violates the 1913 law establishing the Fed's independence.Legal scholars warn that siding with Trump in either case could dramatically expand executive authority. Trump has already tested legal boundaries across immigration, diversity, and civil service policy. While lower courts have often blocked his initiatives, the Supreme Court—now with a 6-3 conservative majority including three Trump appointees—has frequently sided with him. The Cook case raises unprecedented constitutional questions, as no president has ever removed a Fed governor.Meanwhile, Trump's tariff actions have destabilized global trade relations and spurred economic uncertainty, though his allies argue they are central to his economic strategy. A decision favoring Trump in both cases could weaken institutional checks on executive power and erode the principle of independent monetary policy.Key parts of Trump's economic agenda now in Supreme Court's hands | ReutersIn Washington, D.C., immigrant neighborhoods like Mount Pleasant, Petworth, and Columbia Heights are pushing back against a surge in Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) arrests under President Donald Trump's intensified immigration enforcement campaign. Local residents have begun organizing in real-time—using chat groups and in-person protests—to disrupt ICE detentions, including a recent case where bystanders successfully pressured officers to release a Guatemalan man. These actions reflect growing distrust and fear within largely Latino communities, where residents report increased racial profiling and aggressive policing.The Trump administration's recent declaration of a “crime emergency” in D.C., coupled with the federalization of local police and a heightened ICE presence, has heightened tensions, especially in areas with deep immigrant roots. Community members and advocacy groups say people are being targeted based on appearance or location, not criminal history. Businesses that once bustled with immigrant patrons are seeing sharp declines in foot traffic, as many residents now avoid public spaces out of fear.Federal officials defend the enforcement as targeting serious offenders, but critics point out that many arrests involve individuals without criminal records. A Supreme Court ruling this month has further enabled ICE to continue race- or location-based arrests. Meanwhile, residents like Yessica Gonzalez and Nelvin Rodriguez say the climate of fear is unlike anything they've previously experienced. The increased enforcement has not only disrupted lives but also strained local economies and community trust.Washington's immigrant neighborhoods push back against ICE arrests | ReutersThe U.S. Senate has confirmed John Squires, a veteran intellectual property attorney and former Goldman Sachs executive, as the new head of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) under President Donald Trump. Squires takes over at a critical time, as the agency grapples with global competition from China and emerging legal challenges surrounding artificial intelligence in the patent process. His appointment follows a broad push by Senate Republicans to confirm a slate of Trump nominees despite Democratic opposition.Squires brings a deep background in both corporate and legal arenas, having worked on IP and tech issues at firms like Honeywell and most recently at Dilworth Paxson, where he focused on AI, blockchain, and cybersecurity. He has also taught at the University of Pennsylvania. His predecessor, Kathi Vidal, led the USPTO during the Biden administration and returned to private practice following Trump's 2024 election victory.The USPTO plays a vital role in the American innovation ecosystem, handling patent and trademark applications and advising the government on intellectual property policy. The agency's Patent Trial and Appeal Board frequently mediates high-stakes disputes over patent validity, especially in the tech sector. Squires steps into the role amid heightened political scrutiny, including a controversial Commerce Department order to review patents held by Harvard University as part of a broader White House campaign linked to campus antisemitism concerns.US Senate confirms Trump's pick to run US Patent and Trademark Office | ReutersThis week's closing theme is by Gustav Mahler.This week's closing theme comes from one of the most enigmatic works in the orchestral repertoire: Mahler's Symphony No. 7, specifically its haunting first movement, Langsam – Allegro risoluto, ma non troppo. Composed between 1904 and 1905 and premiered on September 19, 1908, this symphony marks a fascinating midpoint in Mahler's artistic evolution—bridging the lush Romanticism of his earlier works with the more fractured, modernist terrain of his later symphonies.The first movement opens with a dark, slow introduction featuring the eerie voice of the tenor horn, an instrument rarely heard in symphonic writing. Its strange, searching call sets a tone of unease, as if the music is emerging from shadow. What follows is a restless march full of contrasts—grim fanfares, lyrical episodes, and bursts of uneasy energy—all presented with Mahler's characteristic sense of orchestral color and irony.Unlike the more spiritual or pastoral moods of Mahler's other symphonies, the Seventh is often described as "problematic," even "nightmarish"—a label Mahler himself rejected. He referred to the symphony as a progression “from night into day,” and this opening movement represents the beginning of that journey: turbulent, disoriented, and shot through with moments of beauty and menace.Mahler's orchestration here is dense and highly detailed, often requiring massive forces and unconventional instruments. Yet beneath its complexity lies a deep emotional current—one that shifts rapidly from the grotesque to the sublime. The movement ends not with resolution but with a kind of defiant uncertainty, a theme Mahler would continue to explore in his final works.As our closing theme this week, Langsam – Allegro reminds us that the path through darkness is rarely straightforward—and that art, like life, often resists tidy interpretation.Without further ado, Gustav Mahler's Langsam – Allegro risoluto, ma non troppo– enjoy! This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Jamie Holcombe left after almost seven years as the USPTO CIO, where he focused on cloud, AI and managing IT as an asset to the mission.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

From Coke Morgan Stewart's decisive actions at the USPTO, to Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick's unexpected “patent tax” trial balloon, to the ongoing Federal Circuit drama — it felt impossible to figure out where to start telling the story. The only way to make sense of it all was to bring in three of our favorite journalists who cover these issues every day:* Eileen McDermott, Editor-in-Chief of IPWatchdog* Dani Kass, Senior Reporter at Law360* Michael Shapiro, Senior Reporter at BloombergTogether, we unpacked the biggest developments, why they matter, and how they're being covered — with behind-the-scenes stories and candid insights about what it's like to report on patents and IP.What We CoveredUSPTO's New Direction* Coke Morgan Stewart's rapid moves as acting director — especially at the PTAB* How she's balancing speed, decisiveness, and practical limitsPatent Tax Story* The Wall Street Journal report on a possible tax on patent value* Lutnick's role and Stewart's public comments walking a fine lineChoosing a USPTO Director & John Squires* Breaking news about John Squires' nomination and confirmation process* Early signals of what he'll prioritize as directorFederal Circuit & Judge Newman* How practitioner tips shape coverage of the court* Judge Pauline Newman's saga — and what it's like getting to know her personallyOn the Hill* Tillis, Coons, and the shifting dynamics in Congress* Prospects for PERA (101), PREVAIL (PTAB), and RESTORE (injunctions)Copyright & AI* The firing of Shira Perlmutter as head of the Copyright Office* Pushback against the office's AI guidanceBehind the Notebook* How these reporters choose stories and what they wish got more attention* Why they love covering the IP community, despite all the complexities* Impact of judges, public officials, and Bloomberg terminal users following their coverageThe discussion reveals how much these journalists shape — and are shaped by — the IP world itself. They're not just reporting on it; they're in constant dialogue with practitioners, policymakers, and innovators who live with these changes every day. Judges read their work, practitioners feed them stories, and policymakers react to their reporting.Chapters00:00 – Welcome & Guest Intros01:23 – What's your vantage point in the IP world?17:53 – How do you decide what's worth covering in IP news?22:49 – What's the mood in the patent community right now?32:33 – The proposed ‘patent tax': threat or opportunity?38:02 – The politics behind selecting a USPTO Director54:21 – Final thoughts and advice for the IP communitySubscribe & Support on YouTubeClause 8's new season is recorded from our brand-new studio — and, for the first time, every episode will be available in video. If you'd like to support the show and catch all the new video content, please subscribe for free on YouTube so we can reach even more people interested in the IP story. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.voiceofip.com

Send us a textTrademark scams are targeting Amazon sellers after filing with the USPTO. Many receive fake mail asking for a publication fee that looks official. Sellers can protect their brands by verifying trademark records directly and avoiding fake fees.Protect your brand from scams. Get help registering your trademark the right way: https://bit.ly/4lsWHOxDownload our advanced Amazon tips and start applying strategies top sellers use to stay ahead: https://bit.ly/45snCUU#AmazonSellers #TrademarkHelp #AmazonTips #USPTOWarning #BrandProtectionWatch these videos on YouTube:Improve Search Rank and Drive Growth: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wyeMk5p-oww&list=PLDkvNlz8yl_b9RMGmU9XeqkI9D7QDOAI8&index=2The Easy Way to Find Amazon Keywords That Rank: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kmBZPid_iA&list=PLDkvNlz8yl_b9RMGmU9XeqkI9D7QDOAI8&index=3-----------------------------------------------Download our PPC guide: https://bit.ly/4lF0OYXDownload our SEO toolkit: https://bit.ly/3JyMDGoDownload our Amazon Crisis Kit (this is good to have before problem occurs): https://bit.ly/4maWHn0Grow your brand with DTC. Book a DTC call with us: https://bit.ly/4kOz6rrTimestamps00:00 - Fake Trademark Fee Scam Explained00:30 - What the Letter Looks Like01:00 - Why It's a Scam and How It Works01:45 - What You Actually Need to Do02:20 - Where to Verify Your Trademark02:50 - How to Avoid Trademark Scams for Good----------------------------------------------Follow us:LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/28605816/Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/stevenpopemag/Pinterest: https://www.pinterest.com/myamazonguys/Twitter: https://twitter.com/myamazonguySubscribe to the My Amazon Guy podcast: https://podcast.myamazonguy.comApple Podcast: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/my-amazon-guy/id1501974229Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/4A5ASHGGfr6s4wWNQIqyVwSupport the show

The U.S. judiciary announced plans to increase security for sensitive information on its case management system following what it described as “recent escalated cyberattacks of a sophisticated and persistent nature.” In a Thursday statement, the federal judiciary said it's “taking additional steps to strengthen protections for” that information. It also said its “further enhancing security of the system and to block future attacks, and it is prioritizing working with courts to mitigate the impact on litigants.” The statement from the third branch comes one day after a Politico report revealed that its case filing system had recently been breached. That report cited unnamed sources who were concerned that the identities of confidential court informants may have been compromised. While the federal courts' statement acknowledged a recent escalation in cyberattacks on its case management system, it didn't confirm details of the reported breach. In response to a FedScoop request for additional information about the reported attack, a spokesman for the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts declined to comment and pointed back to the statement. The reported hack and statement come after a cyberbreach of the same system in 2020. In early 2021, during a hack of SolarWinds' Orion products, the federal courts disclosed that it found “apparent compromise” of the Case Management/Electronic Case Files system (CM/ECF) and was investigating the matter. Its statement after that breach similarly indicated that “federal courts are immediately adding new security procedures to protect highly sensitive confidential documents filed with the courts.” Jamie Holcombe is joining Maryland-based technology company US AI after wrapping up roughly six-and-a-half years as the chief information officer of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. Holcombe, who served as both CIO and chief AI officer at USPTO, will be vice president of the AI firm, with a focus on scaling its technology throughout the federal government, according to a Thursday announcement from US AI shared with FedScoop. Holcombe's last day at the agency was Wednesday, according to a USPTO spokeswoman. Deborah Stephens, deputy CIO for the agency, will serve as acting CIO. At USPTO, Holcombe oversaw “one of the federal government's largest IT transformations,” per the announcement. That work included leading the agency's transition to a cloud-first environment and the launch of its AI Lab, where USPTO can test use cases. As part of his new role, Holcombe will work to expand US AI's Intelligent Computing Platform, which is aimed at accelerating the adoption of AI in sectors that are highly regulated, across government. He will also lead the company's strategy to align its technology with its use in public sector and regulated areas, scaling codeless and zero-trust tools, and build on the company's “values of clarity, security, and accessibility in AI deployment.” The Daily Scoop Podcast is available every Monday-Friday afternoon. If you want to hear more of the latest from Washington, subscribe to The Daily Scoop Podcast  on Apple Podcasts, Soundcloud, Spotify and YouTube.

Teddy Downey, Executive Editor of The Capitol Forum, sits down with Tahir Amin, co-founder of I-MAK, to discuss the pharmaceutical industry's misuse of the U.S. patent system—and what it costs American patients and taxpayers.They dive into I-MAK's new report, Overpatented, Overpriced, and explore:How drugs like Eliquis and Ozempic are protected by dozens to hundreds of patentsThe role of patent term extensions, follow-on patents, and settlement deals in delaying generic competitionHow companies like Novo Nordisk and BMS generate tens of billions in additional revenue through strategic patentingWhy the Hatch-Waxman Act and USPTO are failing to protect patients and the public interest Full report: https://www.i-mak.org/overpatented/

Quantum computing stands at the precipice of transforming our world—and the legal frameworks protecting this revolutionary technology are racing to keep pace. Dive deep into the realm where quantum physics meets intellectual property as we explore how these powerful machines are already solving problems classical computers can barely touch. From accelerating drug discovery and designing next-generation batteries to optimizing traffic systems and revolutionizing artificial intelligence, quantum computing isn't just theoretical anymore. It's real, it's practical, and it's raising profound questions about who can own these breakthroughs.We unpack the landmark Ex Parte Gao case, where the US Patent Trial and Appeal Board recognized a quantum algorithm as patentable technology rather than dismissing it as an abstract mathematical concept. This decision signals a pivotal shift in how patent offices might evaluate quantum innovations, creating a pathway for protecting quantum algorithms when they're tied to hardware implementation and technical outcomes.Through a global tour of quantum IP approaches, we reveal how different countries are positioning themselves in the quantum race. China leads in quantum communication patents, Europe welcomes technically-implemented quantum inventions, while nations from Brazil to Kenya are building capacity to support future quantum ecosystems. For inventors and entrepreneurs, we share practical strategies for securing protection. Frame your quantum innovation as a technical solution, tie algorithms to hardware steps, and demonstrate concrete improvements over classical methods.Beyond patents, we explore emerging collaborative models, such as cross-licensing agreements and potential quantum patent pools, that could accelerate innovation while reducing legal friction. Universities, startups, and global tech leaders are all navigating this rapidly evolving landscape, making strategic decisions about what to protect, what to share, and how to build sustained competitive advantage.Join us as we decode the invisible laws shaping the quantum revolution, one qubit at a time. The future of computing and perhaps our world, depends on getting this intersection of breakthrough science and intellectual property right.Send us a text

Welcome to another episode of The Lindsey Anderson Show! Today, I'm diving into a topic that I'm sure many of you haven't thought much about: legal protections for your online content. As entrepreneurs and online business owners, we show up online every day—creating content, generating sales, and building our brands. But here's the real question: Is your business actually protected?The truth is, many entrepreneurs are losing money, missing opportunities, and even getting taken advantage of because they haven't protected their intellectual property. Whether you're posting on social media, creating content, or launching offers, you need to ensure that your work is legally protected. Today's guest, Robert Thony, is here to help us navigate this crucial area of business. He'll be sharing how to protect your intellectual property before it's too late. I'm so excited for you to hear this!Guest IntroductionRobert Thony is the founder of Tony Law and Entertainment, a firm that specializes in IP law and business law. With over a decade of experience, Robert has been helping entrepreneurs, creators, and online business owners protect their work and secure better deals.He's an expert in trademarks, copyrights, contracts, and negotiation strategies. Robert has worked with countless brands to ensure they're legally protected while continuing to grow. His goal is simple: to help businesses not only survive but thrive, all while being legally secure. Robert provides guidance on everything from brand protection to navigating the complexities of the digital world with legal insight. Let's dive into the conversation with Robert!Protect Your Brand and Business - Key TakeawaysProtect Your Brand Early: It's critical to get your business structure right from the start. Whether you're a consultant, or running a tech startup, choosing the right legal entity is key to protecting your business in the long run.Trademark Protection: Your brand name and logo should be protected from day one. Register them with the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) to prevent infringement and legal issues down the line.Trademark Search: Always conduct a comprehensive trademark search to make sure no one else is using a name or logo that's too similar to yours.Legal Structure Matters: The legal structure you choose for your business affects the kind of protection you need. For example, a service-based business will have different legal needs than a product-based business.Investment in Protection: While it costs $350 per mark to file a trademark application with the USPTO, it's a worthwhile investment to secure your brand's future. The process can take 9-12 months, but it's worth the wait for the protection it provides.Why Entrepreneurs Wait Too Long: Entrepreneurs often delay legal protection due to budget constraints or the desire to focus on marketing. However, failing to protect your brand early could lead to costly rebranding or legal disputes in the future.Client Example: The Cost of WaitingWe share a common example that happens way too often. A business owner starts using a name that's similar to another trademarked brand. At first, everything seems fine, but then, the clients start getting confused—some even reach out to the wrong business thinking they're contacting the right one.In these situations, the client may have to rebrand entirely, which is a huge financial and logistical burden. And sometimes, the other business already owns the trademark, which means they have the legal right to shut you down. This happens all the time, and it can set you back months, if not years, in your business journey.Key Quotes"If you're serious about business, you need to get this protection so that you're not wasting...

In this episode of the Data Science Salon Podcast, we sit down with Anusha Nerella, a seasoned technology leader and Senior Principal Software Engineer at State Street Corporation. With over a decade of experience across top-tier institutions like Barclaycard, Citibank, and USPTO, Anusha brings deep technical expertise in AI/ML automation, enterprise engineering, and scalable financial systems. In this conversation, Anusha shares her journey from software development to leading enterprise-scale AI initiatives, her work in high-frequency trading and automation frameworks, and her passion for mentoring and advancing the next generation of tech talent. Key Highlights: Engineering with Purpose: Anusha walks us through how she's building intelligent, AI-powered automation frameworks to optimize performance and reliability in financial systems at scale. Bridging Code & Vision: A look at how her work integrates AI, DevOps, and big data architecture to deliver long-lasting, strategic impact within complex enterprise environments. Leading with Intention: Anusha discusses the role of mentorship, community involvement, and advocacy in shaping a more inclusive and innovative future in tech. The Future of AI Automation: Insight into where the industry is heading—from operationalizing machine learning to driving cross-industry transformation with intelligent systems. Whether you're a technical founder, enterprise leader, or aspiring AI engineer, this episode offers a deep dive into how real-world AI systems are built, scaled, and delivered with precision and purpose.

Welcome to Episode 181 of Entertainment Law Update! In this jam-packed episode, Gordon Firemark and Tamera Bennett break down the latest legal developments in entertainment, media, and IP law. From procedural shifts at the USPTO to landmark copyright rulings … Read the rest The post Mustangs, Midjourney, and Minions—Oh My! appeared first on Entertainment Law Update.

I am Rolf Claessen and my co-host Ken Suzan and I are welcoming you to episode 164 of our podcast IP Fridays! Today's interview guests are Arthur Rothrock and Nicholas Sarokhanian. My co-host Ken Suzan talks with them about AI tools for IP lawyers. Arthur Rothrock https://www.linkedin.com/in/rothrocka/ Nicholas Sarokhanian https://btlaw.com/en/people/nicholas-sarokhanian Before we jump into the […]

In this inaugural “Legal Tuesday” edition of The Rainmaking Podcast, Scott Love introduces a new series focused specifically on legal professionals, offering expert insight for lawyers navigating complex transitions. Scott speaks with Hilary Gerzhoy, a seasoned ethics lawyer and thought leader on professional responsibility, who shares valuable guidance on avoiding ethical pitfalls during lateral partner moves. She outlines real-world examples of landmines, such as premature client contact, improper solicitation of team members, and breach of fiduciary duty—each of which can derail a move or trigger legal retaliation. The conversation covers essential considerations for departing lawyers, including how to handle sensitive communications, what firms can legally withhold, and how to protect client relationships ethically. The episode is especially timely for law firm partners considering a move, and serves as a cautionary guide to avoid becoming tomorrow's legal headline. This Tuesday edition of the podcast delivers focused legal guidance, while Thursday episodes will continue serving broader professional services audiences. Visit: https://therainmakingpodcast.com/ YouTube: https://youtu.be/LAtWIzixoeY ----------------------------------------

The US Patent and Trademark Office has already invested heavily in artificial intelligence capabilities. Its employees have access to several tools to review documents and reduce the burden of administrative and clerical tasks on examiners through a new request for information, the USPTO wants to accelerate its use of AI tools with more on USPTO plans to bring these capabilities to its workforce. Federal News Networks' Executive Editor Jason Miller joins me now.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

On this episode of Brand & New, INTA Chief Policy Officer Heather Steinmeyer sits down with David Gooder, INTA's newly appointed Senior Advisor and former Commissioner for Trademarks at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). In this insightful conversation recorded at INTA's 2025 Annual Meeting in San Diego, California, Ms. Steinmeyer and Mr. Gooder explore the evolving role of global intellectual property (IP) offices, as well as the delicate balance IP offices must strike between serving their users and advancing broader competitiveness goals. Mr. Gooder shares his unique perspective from both sides of the IP ecosystem, having worked as chief trademark counsel at Jack Daniels Properties before leading the USPTO's trademark operations through five transformative years. As he transitions into his new role helping INTA deepen collaboration with IP offices worldwide, this conversation offers valuable insights into the future of IP protection and the strategic importance of trademark systems in fostering global competitiveness. Resources:  About David Gooder INTA Welcomes David Gooder as Senior Advisor (INTA, May 2025) David Gooder to depart USPTO (USPTO, February 2025)  

This episode features a very special guest, Erik Brunetti, founder of one of the most influential streetwear brands - Fuct. When Erik's trademark application for 'Fuct' was denied numerous times by the USPTO due allegedly being “scandalous and immoral,” he became impassioned and ended up taking his case all the way to the Supreme Court (alongside his attorney, John Sommers) winning the ultimate battle. Listen to his story here. Episode time stamps: (00:28) I provide a brief background and legal timeline of the Iancu v. Brunetti case, including audio clips from the oral argument of the Supreme Court hearing (8:08) Interview with Erik Brunetti

AI, IP, and the Future of Litigation Funding Kevin Skrzysowski spoke with Certum Group colleague Bryce Barcelo, Director of IP Strategy  and professor of patent litigation at the University of Houston Law Center, about the evolving landscape of artificial intelligence, intellectual property, and litigation funding. They discussed how lawyers are using (and misusing) AI tools, the legal risks tied to data training and copyright, the booming demand for IP funding, and what upcoming changes at the USPTO could mean for patent holders. Whether you're navigating AI adoption, exploring funding options, or just curious about what's next in litigation strategy, this episode offers a fresh look at where the industry is headed.

Can you patent an illegal invention? What about trademarking a product that breaks federal law—or copyrighting something downright criminal? In this episode of The Patenting for Inventors Podcast, you'll learn about the surprising differences in how U.S. intellectual property law treats illegality. From patented bongs to denied THC trademarks, you'll learn where the USPTO draws the line—and where it doesn't. Tune in to find out how far you can push the boundaries of innovation when the law hasn't quite caught up.   Connect with Adam Diament E-mail: adiament@nolanheimann.com   Website: https://www.nolanheimann.com/legal-team/adam-diament   Phone/Text: (424)281-0162   YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC5cTADZzJfPoyQMjnW-rtRw Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/trademarkpatentlaw/   LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/adam-diament-j-d-ph-d-180a005/   Amazon Book Page: https://www.amazon.com/stores/author/B005SV2RZC/allbooks?ingress=0&visitId=831aff71-513b-4158-ad73-386ede491e93

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office had a busy summer in 2024. Businesses and individuals with AI and software-based inventions paid particularly close attention to the agency when, in July, it released updated guidance on how patent examiners should evaluate related claims for patent subject matter eligibility. In BakerHostetler's second annual IP Perspectives (BHIPP) thought leadership piece, the Intellectual Property Practice Group highlights a myriad of IP-related topics that are at the forefront of industry developments and current challenges and trends.

Prosecution laches is an infrequently used equitable doctrine that bars enforcement of a patent when the patentee has unreasonably delayed prosecution in a way that prejudices others. It is most commonly used by accused infringers as a defense in patent litigation, although the USPTO can also use it as a basis for refusing allowance. Regardless, […]

Prosecution laches is an infrequently used equitable doctrine that bars enforcement of a patent when the patentee has unreasonably delayed prosecution in a way that prejudices others. It is most commonly used by accused infringers as a defense in patent litigation, although the USPTO can also use it as a basis for refusing allowance. Regardless, it is most often used against the backdrop of multiple continuation applications.Continuation applications are applications which all follow from (i.e., claim priority to) a single earlier application. Creating “families” of patent applications in this way is a very common practice and allows the patent owner to claim different embodiments of the original invention in response to changes in marketplace and/or technological evolution. In Sonos Inc. v. Google LLC, currently on appeal to the Federal Circuit, the district court, following a jury verdict in favor of the patentee, found Sonos’ patents unenforceable due to prosecution laches, despite Sonos diligently prosecuting continuation applications for 13 years, serially filing a continuation with each allowance. If upheld, the ruling will represent a notable change to patent practice with far-reaching effects for U.S. innovators of all stripes including, independent innovators, corporate innovators, and universities.This FedSoc forum will use the Sonos v. Google and other laches cases as needed to explore the conflict between prosecution laches and current continuation practice and much more.Featuring:Joseph Matal, Principal, Clear IP, LLCPaul Michel, Former Chief Judge, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal CircuitGene Quinn, President & CEO, IPWatchdog, Inc.Moderator: Jeffrey Depp, Policy Consultant, Center for Strategic and International Studies--To register, click the link above.

Send me a messageIn this episode of the Climate Confident podcast, I spoke with Ryan Schermerhorn, a US-based patent attorney who's been helping clean tech innovators navigate the IP maze - until recently with the help of a now-suspended fast-track programme.We discussed the United States Patent and Trademark Office's (USPTO) Climate Change Mitigation Pilot Program, which allowed inventors of emissions-reducing technologies to get patents approved in months rather than years, at no cost. Ryan explained how it worked, why it was a big deal for clean tech startups, and how it quietly disappeared earlier this year following a political shift.We also unpacked what this means for innovators now. Ryan shared practical alternatives - like using international patent offices with similar climate fast-track schemes and leveraging the Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) to speed things up globally.We also covered the balance between IP protection and open innovation, why patents still matter in the climate crisis, and how to protect ideas early without blowing the budget.If you're working in climate tech, clean energy, or emissions monitoring and need to protect or scale your innovation, this episode is for you.Support the showPodcast supportersI'd like to sincerely thank this podcast's amazing supporters: Lorcan Sheehan Jerry Sweeney Andreas Werner Stephen Carroll Roger Arnold And remember you too can Support the Podcast - it is really easy and hugely important as it will enable me to continue to create more excellent Climate Confident episodes like this one.ContactIf you have any comments/suggestions or questions for the podcast - get in touch via direct message on Twitter/LinkedIn. If you liked this show, please don't forget to rate and/or review it. It makes a big difference to help new people discover the show. CreditsMusic credits - Intro by Joseph McDade, and Outro music for this podcast was composed, played, and produced by my daughter Luna Juniper

When you're a patent attorney facing the challenge of creating high-quality patents in half the time you once had, technology isn't just a luxury—it's survival. FX Leduc, co-founder and CEO of DeepIP (https://www.deepip.ai), joins Charlie Uniman to reveal how artificial intelligence transforms intellectual property practice from the ground up.Patent practitioners who once had 40 hours to draft applications now operate under 20-hour constraints. DeepIP addresses this pressure by providing an AI assistant that saves attorneys 20-50% of their drafting time while actually improving patent quality. Among the features that make DeepIP's approach to patent drafting unique? First, Deep IP's tech integrates directly within Microsoft Word, eliminating disruptive application switching. Second, the tech creates an iterative process where attorneys maintain complete control.The conversation takes a fascinating turn when FX explains how DeepIP handles office actions by connecting with USPTO file wrappers to analyze rejections and identify effective counterarguments. This capability becomes increasingly crucial as patent offices worldwide develop their own AI tools to generate automated rejections, creating what FX describes as an urgent need for law firms to adopt similar technologies or risk falling behind.Looking toward the future, FX highlights two key AI developments transforming the field: agentic AI, which can navigate complex workflows with semi-autonomous capabilities, and personalization, which adapts to an attorney's distinctive drafting style or client-specific requirements. These advancements represent not just efficiency gains but a fundamental shift in how patents are created and prosecuted.By addressing the unique challenges of intellectual property practice, DeepIP exemplifies how specialized legal technology can deliver genuine value. Whether you're a patent attorney, an IP professional, or a legal innovator generally, this episode offers essential insights into how AI is rapidly becoming not just an advantage but a necessity in intellectual property law.

Today, Jeff Harty and Drew Hirshfeld talk about the potential impact of the DOGE advisory board on the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. Their conversation covers how the office is funded and how the USPTO maintains productivity and handles the large backlog of patent applications. They also discuss the impact of the return-to-office executive order and the importance of hiring the best talent as patent examiners, wherever they're based.In this episode, Jeff Harty and Drew Hirshfeld discuss: The impact of the DOGE advisory board on the USPTO.Advantages of having a clear prosecution record in patent cases.How the hiring freeze and the return-to-office executive order affect those at the USPTO.Extensive productivity reports for USPTO examiners.The crossroads facing the USPTO.Key Takeaways: Those with senior roles at the USPTO often have two main goals: to improve the quality of work and to improve pendency—getting results of patent decisions to the applicants faster.If an examiner is clear as to why they are making decisions and an applicant can see what the examiner is doing, it is easier to understand what is happening. When it is not clear, the examiner and applicant can talk past each other, and that is where discrepancies will happen. Allowing for telework and work from home allows the USPTO to recruit top talent from around the country, not just in the immediate area of the office. The USPTO is unique in that it is entirely funded by user fees, not federal tax dollars.“I think that the USPTO's best quality initiative is its telework program, its ability for people to work at home, because you're able to choose people from a pool that's across the country now, as opposed to just in the Alexandria, Virginia, area.” —Drew HirshfeldAbout Drew Hirshfeld: Hirshfeld was a long-tenured employee of the U. S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and was named one of Managing IP's Top 50 Most Influential People in IP in 2021 (Managing IP is part of the Euromoney Institutional Investor PLC group). Hirshfeld began his career at the USPTO as a patent examiner in 1994 and has held a variety of senior management positions. He was named Commissioner for Patents in 2015 and performed the functions and duties of the Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the USPTO from January 2021 to April 2022. Most recently,Hirshfeld served as Acting Deputy Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Acting Deputy Director.Hirshfeld now brings his wealth of patent prosecution and litigation experience to Schwegman Lundberg & Woessner. His achievements included leading the USPTO's response to the Supreme Court's 2021 Arthrex decision by implementing a new process for director review of final written decisions from the USPTO's Patent Trial and Appeal Board; serving on the USPTO's Precedential Opinion Panel to decide issues of exceptional importance to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board; and overseeing extensive patent prosecution training for patent examiners and members of the public.While performing the functions and duties of the Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the USPTO, Hirshfeld was responsible for more than 13,000 employees and an annual budget of more than $4 billion. He was also responsible for all USPTO functions related to the examination and issuance of all patents. In addition, he championed the USPTO's mentoring program.Outside of work, Hirshfeld and his wife have three daughters. He enjoys woodworking to make things for his family, including an acoustic guitar, kitchen cabinets, and furniture.Connect with Drew Hirshfeld: Website: slwip.com Email: ahirshfeld@slwip.com LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/drew-hirshfeld Connect with Jeff Harty: Website: nyemaster.com/attorney-directory/jeffrey-d-hartyEmail: jharty@nyemaster.comLinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/jeff-harty-5a9a1643

PTO 'whistleblower' Julie Burke and patent prosecution guru Clint Mehall join Eli on the season finale of Clause 8 to break down what's happening at the USPTO—and what's still left to be done.On this episode, they discuss: *Insights from the Reddit r/patentexaminer thread*Previous and current plans to reduce the record patent application backlog*Should the USPTO withdraw patent eligibility example 47 for AI? *Previous administration's decision to end AFCP program and ideas for variation of AFCP program to help reduce the backlog*Misguided priorities and personnel decisions during last administration *Improving morale and performance of examiners *Adjusting credit system & improving culture to help examiners identify allowable subject matter *Choice of Valencia Wallace Smith as Acting Commissioner for Patents *USPTO's decision to deprioritize examination of continuation patent applications *USPTO rescinding memorandum for discretionary denials at PTAB and Director taking over handling of the requests for discretionary denials *Aligning post-grant proceedings at PTAB with mission of USPTO*Suggestions about switching to a registration system for patents that does not require examination And, much more! This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.voiceofip.com

On this episode, associates discuss how the USPTO might be affected by the Trump administration.

Bio Jeffrey Zell founded JM Zell Partners, Ltd in 1989, with a unique vision for providing client-centered real estate consulting. Developed over his 30-year career, Jeff's innovative approach to delivering practical solutions while fostering meaningful client relationships forms the core of JM Zell's value-added process. Jeff believes that only by partnering with clients and truly understanding their business as well as their real estate needs can JM Zell provide long-range, comprehensive, unbiased advice. By evaluating factors including a client's long-term needs, financial objectives, and corporate culture, JM Zell is able to provide customized, proactive and fiscally responsible solutions for major corporations, institutional investors, professional firms, unions, governmental institutions and not-for-profit organizations. To fully realize his vision, Jeff attracted a diverse, multi-disciplinary staff of seasoned professionals who share in his philosophy (and in the profits of the company, based on client satisfaction and results). This collective approach ensures that everyone at JM Zell works for the common good, and that our client's best interests are never compromised. Jeff has provided strategic planning, investment, lease negotiation, development consulting and project management services for award-winning projects for over 25 years. Jeff's greatest strengths are his creative strategic thinking, business acumen, transactional ability, marketing savvy and financial expertise. A member of the distinguished Counselors of Real Estate, available only to the most respected real estate specialists who are known for innovation and creative problem solving, Jeff is a licensed real estate broker in the District of Columbia, Maryland and Virginia. Show Notes Current Role and Origin Story Current Role Overview (5:00) Jeff Zell shares his role as President and CEO of JM Zell Partners and his time allocation. Upbringing and Early Influences (00:05:37) Jeff discusses his upbringing as a first-generation American and its impact on his career. Family Background (00:05:49) He shares his parents' history as Holocaust survivors and their immigration journey. Multilingual Childhood (00:06:06) Jeff describes growing up in a multilingual household and the challenges it posed in school. Early Education Experience (00:08:01) He recounts his initial struggles in elementary school due to language barriers. Father's Influence and Business Start (00:10:07) Jeff talks about his father's successful woodworking business and his early involvement. Transition to Private School (00:10:20) He explains his move to a private boarding school for better educational support. College Journey at Syracuse (00:11:00) Jeff discusses his choice of Syracuse University amidst family expectations. Learning Style and Strengths (00:12:30) He reflects on discovering his strengths in verbal skills over written documentation. Graduate School Experience (00:15:45) Jeff shares his challenges in graduate school at GW and the lack of collaboration. Career Beginning- Rubloff Entry into Real Estate Brokerage (00:17:00) He explains his decision to enter the real estate brokerage field (David W. Kornblatt Co., subsequently acquired by Rubloff) influenced by his father. Early Career in Industrial Brokerage (00:18:45) Jeff recounts starting as an industrial broker and his experiences in the field. Met Bill Janes on his first day Property Management Growth (00:19:45) He discusses the growth of the property management company he was involved with with Equitable Life and Prudential Insurance as clients Establishing Rubloff's Tenant Brokerage Services (00:23:00) Jeff describes the launch of a tenant brokerage services group and its significance. The Logistics of Real Estate (00:23:40) Discussion on the importance of understanding logistics in real estate operations with Federal Express as his client. Tenant Representation and Property Management (00:24:30) Overview of tenant representation and the challenges of managing landlord-tenant conflicts. JM Zell Partners Formation of JM Zell Partners (00:25:00) Jeff shares how he transitioned from his previous company, Rubloff, to establish JM Zell Partners. Surviving the Early 90s Market Collapse (00:26:00) Strategies Jeff employed to navigate the real estate downturn through consultancy services. Consultative Services Approach (00:27:10) Focus on providing tailored consulting services to clients facing real estate challenges. Nonprofits Became Largest Client Sector (30:00) The sector had capital and needed real estate advisory services Client-Centric Business Model (00:33:15) Jeff explains the core principle of prioritizing client needs over brokerage commissions. Building a National Business (00:37:00) Insights into how Jeff expanded his firm's reputation beyond Washington, D.C. Challenges of Innovative Business Models (00:39:30) Jeff discusses initial hurdles in getting clients to pay for consulting services. Integrating Client Needs into Solutions (00:41:30) Importance of aligning real estate solutions with clients' long-term objectives and corporate culture. Significant Transactions Sanofi $2.3 Billion transaction (42:00) Cambridge, MA Build to Suit deal he procured. Norfolk Southern and Carlyle Site Deal (00:44:00) Discussion about representing Norfolk Southern and the complexities of a significant land deal. Bill Hard Mention of Bill Hard's involvement in previous deals (USPTO) and his retirement. $2.3 Billion Deal Insights (00:44:30) Insights on how a massive deal was accomplished outside of Washington. Sanofi's Rebate Strategy (00:46:30) Discussion on the financial benefits and rebate strategies with Sanofi over the years. Client Relationships and Trust (00:44:12) Reflections on building long-term relationships with clients and the importance of trust. Meridian's Complex Deals (00:47:30) Exploration of the complexities involved in deals with Meridian and SAIC. TTC Building Sale Success (00:50:00) Success story about selling the TTC building at a significantly higher price. Bid Strategy Differences (00:52:20) Explanation of the unique bidding strategy that differentiates their approach from competitors. Fannie Mae Deal Challenges (00:52:45) Challenges faced during the bidding process for a Fannie Mae deal. Pandemic Impact & Recent Federal Government Actions Post-Pandemic Client Needs (00:59:45) Discussion on how the pandemic has altered clients' real estate needs, especially in DC. Law Firms and Market Changes (01:00:30) Insight into the shrinking size of law firms and their changing needs. Future of Office Spaces (01:02:30) Predictions on the transformation of office spaces and the rise of non-profit organizations. Current Challenges in Government (01:03:50) Discussion on the cascading effects of government actions and potential job losses impacting the community. Control Board in D.C. (01:04:40) Concerns about the future of D.C. governance and the possibility of a control board taking over. Zoning Issues (01:05:30) Challenges with zoning changes and lengthy appeal processes affecting development projects. Market Implications Impact of Remote Work (01:06:30) Advising clients on office space optimization amidst the rise of hybrid and remote work models. Technology in Real Estate (01:07:00) How clients leverage technology for efficient real estate operations and portfolio management. Conference Room Dynamics (01:08:00) The evolving role of conference rooms in office settings and personal negotiation preferences. Adaptive Reuse of Properties (01:10:45) Challenges and opportunities in repurposing office buildings for different uses. Value of Parking Garages (01:11:30) Discussion on the rising value of parking garages in urban real estate markets. Future of Office Space (01:15:45) Exploration of the potential transformation of old federal office spaces into mixed-use developments. Challenges in Mixed-Use Developments (01:17:00) Impact of high interest rates on the success of mixed-use projects in Washington D.C, particularly The Wharf. Debt Market Concerns (01:20:00) Concerns about new debt products and their potential impact on the real estate market. Public-Private Partnerships (01:21:00) Discussion on the future of public-private partnerships in D.C. and current project challenges. Business Philosophies Significant Contributions to Real Estate Consulting (01:21:40) Highlighting the evolution of real estate consulting services and successful project execution strategies. Outsourcing and Collaboration (01:20:59) Jeff discusses the importance of collaboration and aligning interests when working with corporations. Advice for Aspiring Entrepreneurs (01:24:00) Jeff advises professionals to be well-rounded and understand all aspects of real estate. Understanding Real Estate Dynamics (01:24:30) He emphasizes the significance of understanding various real estate functions, including debt and property maintenance. In-House Legal Support (01:26:00) Jeff explains the necessity of having internal legal expertise to manage complex documentation. Flexibility in Leasing (01:27:45) He shares strategies for creating flexible leasing agreements to accommodate changing business needs. Personal Priorities Transitioning Leadership (01:29:30) Jeff reveals plans to hand over his company to his son and his ongoing involvement. Life Priorities (01:30:30) He discusses the balance between family, work, and charitable giving in his life. Reflections on Washington D.C. (01:30:39) Jeff expresses his love for Washington D.C. and its cultural richness, highlighting its unique qualities. Similar Episodes Bob Cohen Tom Fulcher Sharon Oliver Bill Janes

Intellectual Property: May the USPTO refuse a trademark because it contains the word Fuck? - Argued: Mon, 10 Mar 2025 11:4:54 EDT

Have you ever considered that your business name might already belong to someone else?  In this episode of Life After Corporate, host Deb Boulanger sits down with trademark attorney Lauren Bercuson to uncover the costly mistakes entrepreneurs make when it comes to trademarks. Lauren explains why securing a URL or registering your business name isn't enough to protect your brand, and she shares the crucial steps every business owner should take before launching. From the risks of skipping a comprehensive trademark search to the dangers of infringing on an existing mark, she breaks down the legal nuances that could make or break your brand. Whether you're naming a new business, launching a product, or starting a podcast, this episode is packed with must-know strategies to avoid legal headaches and financial losses.  Think your brand is safe? You might want to think again.    [00:05- 07:10] Common Misconceptions About Brand Protection   Owning a URL does not grant legal protection for a brand name. Business entity registration does not equate to trademark protection. Trademarking with the USPTO provides a legal defense against name disputes. A registered trademark is policed by the USPTO, preventing similar names from registering.     [07:11 -14:33] The Limits of DIY Trademark Searches   Searching the USPTO database is not enough to confirm trademark availability. Similar-sounding or phonetically equivalent names can still cause conflicts. Google searches do not account for common law trademarks. Trademark attorneys understand nuances like foreign equivalency and industry overlap.     [14:34 - 29:38]  The Trademark Registration Process     A comprehensive search determines if a name is legally available. The USPTO review process takes 8-10 months. Trademark registration strengthens brand identity and legal protection. Businesses with trademarks have an advantage in negotiations and funding.   [22:39 - 30:53] Why Podcasts and Digital Brands Should Be Trademarked   Trademarking a podcast prevents others from using a similar name. Even non-monetized podcasts benefit from brand protection. Legal conflicts arise when similar show names confuse audiences. Entrepreneurs should treat digital assets as valuable business properties.   Mentioned Resources USPTO.gov – The official database for trademark searches. FREE 6-day Crash Course to Understanding Trademarks – A free educational email series. StoryLock Legal (storylocklegal.com) – A legal firm specializing in trademarks.   Connect with Lauren Bercuson Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/laurenbercuson/ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/storylocklegal/ Website: https://www.storylocklegal.com/ Book a free consult: https://www.storylocklegal.com/contact I'd love for you to share this if possible too - perhaps in the show notes: Don't make a $30K mistake - Get Trademark Smart With 6 Quick Emails!   Ready to turn insights into action? Don't just listen—join the movement! The Life After Corporate Community (https://lifeaftercorporate.com/community) is where ambitious women like you connect, collaborate, and get the strategies, tools, and high-level support to grow a thriving, profitable business. Join us now and start making the powerful connections that will elevate your success! https://lifeaftercorporate.com/community   Go to https://lifeaftercorporate.com/podcast  for all episodes 168.  The Chris Voss Method for Closing the Deal! 163.  Joyce Marter's Financial Mindset Fix: The Key to Unlocking Your True Abundance!   87.  Secrets of Great Copywriting with Julie Cabezas   Tweetable Quotes: "If I tell you I got my cookies from Bluebird cookie shop, and somebody else tells you, oh, these cookies are from Blubyrd Cookie Shop, you're not gonna know whether it's Bluebird, spelled traditionally, or Blubyrd."... Lauren Bercuson on Preventing Trademark Confusion "I actually love “THE GREAT DOOVER” because it really doesn't give you any hint of what the goods or services might be. And that is actually scary to a lot of business owners, but those kinds of marks make the absolute best trademarks because they're the most distinctive."...Lauren Bercuson on The Value of Distinctive Trademarks    **TRANSCRIPT AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST**   SUBSCRIBE & LEAVE A FIVE-STAR REVIEW and share this podcast to other growing entrepreneurs!  Get weekly tips on how to create more money and meaning doing work you love and be one of the many growing entrepreneurs in our community. Connect with me on LinkedIn; https://www.linkedin.com/groups/12656341/  or on Instagram or our website at https://lifeaftercorporate.com/podcast.  

In this episode, host Kara welcomes trademark attorney Courtney Alvarez, owner of CMA Trademarks and former USPTO examiner, to discuss the importance of trademark protection for businesses. From her journey transitioning from broadcast journalism to trademark law, to practical advice on protecting your brand, Courtney shares valuable insights for entrepreneurs considering trademark registration.Episode Topics:Courtney's career transition from broadcast journalism to trademark lawHer 11-year experience as a USPTO trademark examinerThe difference between trademarks and other intellectual property protectionsWhen and why businesses should consider trademark registrationStep-by-step process of trademark application and registrationImpact of COVID on trademark processing timelinesCommon trademark application mistakes and how to avoid themInsights:Best time to consider trademark registration is at the business planning stageBusinesses can file "intent to use" applications before actually launchingUSPTO processing times increased from 3 to 8 months post-COVIDTrademark registration enhances business value for potential future salesWorking with experienced trademark attorneys significantly increases approval chancesInitial DIY trademark searches on USPTO.gov can save time and moneyHighlights:00:00 Welcome and Intro00:40 Importance of Trademarks for Businesses 04:48 Career Path to Law and Intellectual Property 09:55 Career Development in Trademark Law 10:53 Transitioning to Entrepreneurship 14:25 Utilizing Past Experience in New Ventures 15:51 Understanding Trademarks and Their Importance 21:21 Trademark Search and Due Diligence 27:51 Trademark Application Process 32:52 Trademark Registration Process and Renewal 38:12 Trademark Law and Entrepreneurial Support 42:29 Podcast episode endedResources:USPTO.gov for preliminary trademark searchesCMA Trademarks website: cmatrademarks.comEmail: courtney@cmatrademarks.comConnect with Courtney on LinkedIn: Courtney M AlvarezCourtney M. Alvarez is the founder of CMA Trademarks, LLC, a boutique law firm providing high quality legal services to clients seeking federal trademark protection. Ms. Alvarez has a global client base ranging from small entrepreneurs to large corporations in all industries, including several clients that have been featured on the show Shark Tank. She uses her decade-plus experience as a Trademark Examining Attorney at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) to help clients successfully register their brand names, logos, and slogans. In the last several years, Ms. Alvarez has been a featured speaker at the ALTLegal “I Love Trademarks” conference, developed a training course to “Search Trademarks like an Examiner,” and also acts as a consultant to attorneys new to the field of trademarks. Visit her website - cmatrademarks.com for trademark consultation and servicesContact Info - +1 202-843-0755Connect with Kara to share your thoughts on the series:Website - http://www.kcdrealestate.com/ Email - kara@kdcrealestate.com Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/karachaffindonofrio/ Facebook -...

Kathy Duda is the President of The Patent Office Professional Association (POPA), which is the union representing USPTO patent examiners. On this episode, she discusses why she remains hopeful amidst current uncertainty around new return to office policies.In the episode, she also discusses:*Positive collaboration with Acting Director Coke Morgan StewartGetting first involved with POPA after it helped her during her pregnancyNegotiating the first collective bargaining agreement (CBA) with the USPTO in 40 yearsWhy she's not getting a whole lot of sleep recentlyExaminers waiting for finality regarding decisions about being able to continue to work remotelyRecord backlog reached at the USPTO during last administration & work to bring it downImpact of AI & what examination might look like in 30 yearsDisclaimer This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.voiceofip.com

En este episodio: chismeamos sobre el futuro laboral de Paquito Parés, nos burlamos de los criptolibertarios tras la estafa de Milei, analizamos las últimas propuestas poco serias del gobierno para atender la violencia machista, y repasamos el nuevo capítulo en la guerra entre TRS y JGO. También discutimos un incidente entre ICE y un estudiante haitiano en Río Piedras, y nos preguntamos: ¿cómo sería una sociedad puertorriqueña verdaderamente meritocrática?" - Si fueras partes de nuestro patreon, hubieras escuchado este episodio ayer. ¡Únete a la mejor comunidad del internet boricua en patreon.com/puestospalproblema! Aprovecha la oferta de 50% de descuento en el primer mes. - Presentado por el mejor internet de Puerto Rico - AeronetPR.com. Cambiate ahora llamando al 787 273 4143. Nuestros Patroncitos PYMES de hoy: Planifica tu futuro hoy para que disfrutes de mayor libertad financiera y ahórrate unos chavitos en la planilla. Abre una IRA hoy y ahorra en contribuciones. También puedes consolidar todas tus IRAs haciendo un rollover. Roy Chévere cuenta con más de 14 años de experiencia y ofrece diferentes alternativas en el mercado ya sea en productos de intereses indexados o fijos. Llámalo ahora mismo para orientarte y sacar tu cita al 787-209-8441 y recuerda también que lo puedes seguir en Instagram como Chevere Financial, Mira que Chévere!!! ¿Deseas aumentar tu salario? ¿Sabes que un buen resumé puede ayudarte? Un buen resumé… es una inversión. En Career Branding contamos con varias certificaciones internacionales para el desarrollo de resumé tanto para el sector privado como para el gobierno federal. Para más información, nos pueden llamar al 787.300.7777 o visite resumeprofesional.com. Matrix Patent Agency se dedica a preparar y radicar aplicaciones de Patentes (de Invención diría la RAE), el documento que emite el USPTO y el cual protege sus derechos sobre 'Inventos' en EE. UU. (y extensiones para protección Global).El principal de Matrix se llama Luis Figarella, PE y Agente de Patentes Registrado en el USPTO (Reg. # 58,300). Los agentes hacemos lo mismo que los abogados de patentes en lo que llamamos el “prosecution” (preparar, radicar y si, ‘negociar’ con el Examinador del USPTO). Si ha pensado alguna ves proteger su ‘invento’, me deja saber y vemos si se puede hacer algo o no. Desde que Matrix comenzó en el 2006, tengo sobre 115 patentes tramitadas y emitidas para mis clientes, 47 de ellas a clientes en PR. 603.557.8420 (C) 603.821.7400 (O) Suscríbete a nuestro Patreon y recibe contenido exclusivo, artículos: https://patreon.com/puestospalproblemaSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

How do patents influence emerging technology innovation? How far could AI and DOGE push our current IP regime? Does it matter that China issues way more patents than the US does? To discuss, ChinaTalk interviewed ​​Andrei Iancu, who served as the director of the US Patent Office under the first Trump administration. Andrei has degrees in aerospace and mechanical engineering, and worked at the legendary Hughes Aircraft Company before going to law school. He is currently in private practice at Sullivan and Cromwell. Co-hosting today is ChinaTalk editor and second year law student at Duke, Nicholas Welch. We get into… The mounting evidence that China's patent system now dominates America's, and whether these indicators constitute an emergency in the innovation ecosystem, Why some US companies now prefer Chinese courts for patent enforcement, The fundamental tension between private rights of inventors and public access to innovations, What congressional inaction on patent eligibility means for AI innovation, and the bills that congress could pass to immediately jumpstart emerging tech investment, What the current administration could do to help USPTO juice the economy, Controversy surrounding the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), and whether DOGE could put PTAB on the chopping block, How Trump will approach patent law and intellectual property rights, including perspectives on appointments and potential reforms. Thanks to CSIS for partnering with us to bring you this episode, the first in a three-episode CSIS Chip Chat series. Outtro Music: Lil Green, I'm Going to Copyright Your Kisses (1941) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Ye39JuJZ4k&ab_channel=LilGreen-Topic Nellie Hill, I'm Gunna Copyright Your Kisses (1951) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D3OcMdxpWas&ab_channel=krobigraubart Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

You cannot get a patent if your invention is obvious. This can be tricky to determine for biotech and pharmaceutical patents. There are competing standards for how this is determined. One is the "reasonable expectation of success" standard, which is a lower threshold than the "predictable results" standard. The Supreme Court refused to hear a case that would have settled this, so we're left with the Federal Circuit's ruling in the case of Vanda Pharmaceuticals vs. Teva Pharmaceuticals. Listen to this episode to learn how these tests can give different results for patentability and what it means for the future biotech and drug patents!

How do patents influence emerging technology innovation? How far could AI and DOGE push our current IP regime? Does it matter that China issues way more patents than the US does? To discuss, ChinaTalk interviewed ​​Andrei Iancu, who served as the director of the US Patent Office under the first Trump administration. Andrei has degrees in aerospace and mechanical engineering, and worked at the legendary Hughes Aircraft Company before going to law school. He is currently in private practice at Sullivan and Cromwell. Co-hosting today is ChinaTalk editor and second year law student at Duke, Nicholas Welch. We get into… The mounting evidence that China's patent system now dominates America's, and whether these indicators constitute an emergency in the innovation ecosystem, Why some US companies now prefer Chinese courts for patent enforcement, The fundamental tension between private rights of inventors and public access to innovations, What congressional inaction on patent eligibility means for AI innovation, and the bills that congress could pass to immediately jumpstart emerging tech investment, What the current administration could do to help USPTO juice the economy, Controversy surrounding the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), and whether DOGE could put PTAB on the chopping block, How Trump will approach patent law and intellectual property rights, including perspectives on appointments and potential reforms. Thanks to CSIS for partnering with us to bring you this episode, the first in a three-episode CSIS Chip Chat series. Outtro Music: Lil Green, I'm Going to Copyright Your Kisses (1941) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Ye39JuJZ4k&ab_channel=LilGreen-Topic Nellie Hill, I'm Gunna Copyright Your Kisses (1951) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D3OcMdxpWas&ab_channel=krobigraubart Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this engaging conversation, Isiuwa shares her journey from New York to DC, highlighting the importance of community and personal connections. She discusses the launch of her card game, Bestie Banter, detailing the creative process, marketing strategies, and the challenges of entrepreneurship. The conversation emphasizes the significance of storytelling, consistency, and the drive to execute ideas while also touching on the balance of personal life and business aspirations.FollowBestie Banteron InstagramOver 100 games sold so far! Get your hands on a game here:https://bestiebanter.comConnect with the founder: Follow on IG@iamisiuwaOther resources mentioned in this episode:USPTO.GOV

En este episodio de Trumpwatch: Elon Musk, ahora copresidente de facto, mete mano en el Tesoro y quiere eliminar la USAID; la 'gran guerra económica' contra Canadá y México se desinfla en menos de 24 horas; y el DNC se prepara para escoger a su nuevo Chairman en medio del caos político. - Si fueras partes de nuestro patreon, hubieras escuchado este episodio ayer. ¡Únete a la mejor comunidad del internet boricua en patreon.com/puestospalproblema! Aprovecha la oferta de 50% de descuento en el primer mes. - Presentado por el mejor internet de Puerto Rico - AeronetPR.com. Cambiate ahora llamando al 787 273 4143. - Nuestros Patroncitos PYMES de hoy: Estás listo para ser parte del futuro de la salud en Puerto Rico?
La Asociación de Industriales de Puerto Rico te invita al Foro de Salud 2025: "Pathways to Health: Innovation and Solutions Forum". Este evento se llevará a cabo el viernes 7 de febrero en el Sheraton Puerto Rico Resort & Casino, Distrito T-Mobile. Un día lleno de innovación, soluciones y colaboración para transformar nuestro sistema de salud. Inscríbete ahora en https://bit.ly/Health_Industry_Summit2025 Para información 787-641-4455 o 939-247-3447 - Foro de Salud 2025, El camino hacia una salud innovadora y soluciones efectivas en Puerto Rico. ¡Te esperamos! Matrix Patent Agency se dedica a preparar y radicar aplicaciones de Patentes (de Invención diría la RAE), el documento que emite el USPTO y el cual protege sus derechos sobre 'Inventos' en EE. UU. (y extensiones para protección Global).El principal de Matrix se llama Luis Figarella, PE y Agente de Patentes Registrado en el USPTO (Reg. # 58,300). Los agentes hacemos lo mismo que los abogados de patentes en lo que llamamos el “prosecution” (preparar, radicar y si, ‘negociar’ con el Examinador del USPTO). Si ha pensado alguna ves proteger su ‘invento’, me deja saber y vemos si se puede hacer algo o no. Desde que Matrix comenzó en el 2006, tengo sobre 115 patentes tramitadas y emitidas para mis clientes, 47 de ellas a clientes en PR. 603.557.8420 (C) 603.821.7400 (O) luis@mxpatent.com- Suscríbete a nuestro Patreon y recibe contenido exclusivo, artículos: https://patreon.com/puestospalproblemaSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this special episode of Clause 8, Eli shares why Coke Morgan Stewart is the perfect person to lead the USPTO. Eli discusses why her selection excites him and the broader implications for the intellectual property field. Reflecting on past directorships and the challenges faced by the USPTO, Eli explores issues such as patent backlogs, Section 101 rejections, and PTAB policies. Highlighting Stewart's experiences and skills, Eli shares his optimism for positive changes under her leadership. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.voiceofip.com

On this episode of Conduct Detrimental: THE Sports Law Podcast, Dan Lust (⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@SportsLawLust)⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠is joined by Mike Kravchenko (⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Watch on YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠) to break down some of the biggest stories in sports law this week... Jimmy Butler's 9-game suspension for conduct detrimental to the team has sparked speculation about his future with the Miami Heat. Losing $3.1 million in salary, Butler could leverage the situation to force his way out if the relationship sours further. The Heat now face a tough decision: work through the internal tension or explore trade options for their star player. The University of Wisconsin released its statement regarding cornerback Xavier Lucas' transfer to the University of Miami, saying a “binding two-year NIL agreement” was violated and that the school has “credible information indicating impermissible contact.” The Utah Yetis face trademark challenges on two fronts. The USPTO rejected the team's application, citing a conflict with YETI, the cooler company, over consumer confusion. Additionally, a local entrepreneur holds a trademark for "Yetis" and is demanding compensation for the team's use of the name. The franchise must now decide whether to appeal, negotiate settlements with both parties, or rebrand entirely... New England Patriots safety Jabrill Peppers was acquitted of assault and battery charges in Boston. While the jury cleared him, Peppers may still face scrutiny under the NFL's Personal Conduct Policy. The duo discuss what this means for his future and thoughts on the legal process. Plenty of things to watch out for this weekend as we head into the NFL championship week...let us know your thoughts and opinions! *** Have a topic you want to write about? ANYONE and EVERYONE can publish for ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ConductDetrimental.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Let us know if you want to join the team. As always, this episode is sponsored by Themis Bar Review: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.themisbarsocial.com/conductdetrimental⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠  Host: Dan Lust (⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@SportsLawLust⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠)  Featuring and Produced by: Mike Kravchenko (⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Watch on YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠) ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Twitter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠TikTok⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Website⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Email

On this episode of Conduct Detrimental: THE Sports Law Podcast, Dan Lust (⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@SportsLawLust)⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠is joined by Mike Kravchenko (⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Watch on YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠) to break down some of the biggest stories in sports law this week... Jimmy Butler's 9-game suspension for conduct detrimental to the team has sparked speculation about his future with the Miami Heat. Losing $3.1 million in salary, Butler could leverage the situation to force his way out if the relationship sours further. The Heat now face a tough decision: work through the internal tension or explore trade options for their star player. The University of Wisconsin released its statement regarding cornerback Xavier Lucas' transfer to the University of Miami, saying a “binding two-year NIL agreement” was violated and that the school has “credible information indicating impermissible contact.” The Utah Yetis face trademark challenges on two fronts. The USPTO rejected the team's application, citing a conflict with YETI, the cooler company, over consumer confusion. Additionally, a local entrepreneur holds a trademark for "Yetis" and is demanding compensation for the team's use of the name. The franchise must now decide whether to appeal, negotiate settlements with both parties, or rebrand entirely... New England Patriots safety Jabrill Peppers was acquitted of assault and battery charges in Boston. While the jury cleared him, Peppers may still face scrutiny under the NFL's Personal Conduct Policy. The duo discuss what this means for his future and thoughts on the legal process. Plenty of things to watch out for this weekend as we head into the NFL championship week...let us know your thoughts and opinions! *** Have a topic you want to write about? ANYONE and EVERYONE can publish for ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ConductDetrimental.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Let us know if you want to join the team. As always, this episode is sponsored by Themis Bar Review: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.themisbarsocial.com/conductdetrimental⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠  Host: Dan Lust (⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@SportsLawLust⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠)  Featuring and Produced by: Mike Kravchenko (⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Watch on YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠) ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Twitter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠TikTok⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Website⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Email

Selling on Amazon is more than just finding a winning product—it's about understanding the legal side of the business to avoid costly mistakes.   In this episode, I'll break down the must-know legal essentials to keep your Amazon business compliant and profitable in 2025.   We'll cover trademarks, patents, taxes, Amazon's strict FBA requirements, and even how to properly pay yourself without hurting your cash flow.   I'll also walk you through how to check for existing trademarks and patents using USPTO and Google Patents, plus practical steps to ensure your product and brand stay protected.   Key Topics Covered:   Why trademarks are more important than ever for Amazon sellers in 2025 How to search for trademarks and patents to avoid legal trouble Amazon's sales tax requirements and how to stay compliant FBA packaging and labeling rules to prevent inventory rejections The smart way to pay yourself while growing your business When and how to bring on a business partner with the right agreements   Legal stuff may not be the most exciting part of running an Amazon business, but ignoring it can cost you everything.   All My Resources: https://www.andyisom.com  

Wes Horbatuck and Greg Orfe bring entrepreneurial passion and innovation to the world of watersport apparel and ecommerce. As founders, Wes and Greg have navigated the high barriers of entry in the apparel industry, scaling Driftline from concept to a Shark Tank-featured brand recognized in Forbes, Outside, and The Inertia. Wes brings expertise in guerrilla marketing and brand growth, while Greg specializes in operations and supply chain optimization, making them a dynamic duo in ecommerce innovation.With a commitment to helping athletes "meet their moment," they've crafted efficient ecommerce strategies, streamlined their Shopify-powered website, and built a brand focused on resilience, quality, and performance. Their story reflects a passion for innovation and entrepreneurship, inspiring others to take bold steps toward success in a competitive landscape.In This Conversation We Discuss:[00:39] Intro[01:23] Testing prototypes and validation[02:29] Realizing the product's potential beyond surfing[03:57] Creating a product for the location[05:24] Dealing with manufacturing challenges[07:36] E-Commerce and website setup challenges[09:04] The market of the Two-in-One Short Concept[12:18] Turning an idea into protected innovation [14:02] Episode sponsors: StoreTester and Intelligems[18:52] Balancing organic sales with Shark Tank[20:41] Reflecting on the Shark Tank experience[25:48] Managing cash flow and spending Post-Shark Tank[27:14] Partnering with better manufacturers[31:15] Building trust with differing roles & perspectives[32:16] Choosing between product expansion & niche focusResources:Subscribe to Honest Ecommerce on YoutubeMen's wetsuit lined boardshorts driftline.co/Follow Wes Horbatuck linkedin.com/in/wesley-horbatuck-6329a616Follow Greg Orfe linkedin.com/in/gregorfeBook a demo today at intelligems.io/Done-for-you conversion rate optimization service storetester.com/If you're enjoying the show, we'd love it if you left Honest Ecommerce a review on Apple Podcasts. It makes a huge impact on the success of the podcast, and we love reading every one of your reviews!Simplecast SummaryOn this episode of Honest Ecommerce, we have Wes Horbatuck and Greg Orfe, founders of Driftline, a watersport apparel brand featured on Shark Tank that's transforming performance wear with their patented wetsuit-lined boardshorts, Drifties™.We talk about the challenges of breaking into the apparel industry, Ecommerce strategies for driving website traffic, tips for streamlining your online store, and so much more!

What better way to wrap up 2024 than a conversation around the future of the USPTO with David Boundy.David is one of the sharpest minds at the intersection of administrative law and intellectual property. Plus, during his tenure at Cantor Fitzgerald, David worked closely with its visionary CEO, Howard Lutnick, who is leading Trump's transition team and Trump's pick for Commerce Secretary.This episode includes David's thoughts on:* Why the next USPTO Director should prioritize examination quality, efficiency, and public interest-driven rule-making.* Advocating for administrative practices that serve innovators better rather than prioritizing bureaucratic processes.* His time at Cantor Fitzgerald and what it's like to work with Howard Lutnick.* Where he gets his personal passion for justice and belief in the patent system as a crucial engine for innovation and economic success. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.voiceofip.com

  Con AeroNet, disfruta de una conexión estable y veloz para toda la familia. Ya sea para trabajar, estudiar o entretenerse, nuestro servicio residencial te garantiza internet confiable en todo momento. Con nuestra red, AeroNet asegura que tu hogar siempre esté conectado, incluso en situaciones climáticas difíciles. La confiabilidad de nuestra infraestructura te da tranquilidad. Con AeroNet, no importa cuántos dispositivos estén conectados al mismo tiempo. Nuestra red ofrece suficiente velocidad y estabilidad para que toda la familia disfrute de internet sin interrupciones.  Cámbiate ahora en Aeronetpr.com  y 787.273.4143 BIENVENIDO Olvin Valentin  Alondra Belaval, Juventud PIP 1.⁠ ⁠Primera semana de escrutinio general y los papelones 2.⁠ ⁠Primera semana de Pablito José como comisionado residente electo ALIANZO POST MORTEM   MATRIX PATENT AGENCY   Matrix Patent Agency se dedica a preparar y radicar aplicaciones de Patentes (de Invención diría la RAE), el documento que emite el USPTO y el cual protege sus derechos sobre 'Inventos' en EE. UU. (y extensiones para protección Global). El principal de Matrix se llama Luis Figarella, PE y Agente de Patentes Registrado en el USPTO (Reg. # 58,300).  Los agentes hacemos lo mismo que los abogados de patentes en lo que llamamos el “prosecution” (preparar, radicar y si, ‘negociar' con el Examinador del USPTO). Si ha pensado alguna ves proteger su ‘invento', me deja saber y vemos si se puede hacer algo o no. Desde que Matrix comenzó en el 2006, tengo sobre 115 patentes tramitadas y emitidas para mis clientes, 47 de ellas a clientes en PR. 603.557.8420 (C)  603.821.7400 (O) luis@mxpatent.com-       JABONERA DON GATO .COM   Los jabones Don Gato son hechos a mano, sin químicos dañinos ni detergentes. Elaborados con los mejores aceites naturales, esenciales y aromàticos, seguros para la piel. Pruébalos y siente la diferencia. Visítalos ahora en jaboneradongato.com  y al utilizar el código "ppp"  obtienes un 10% de descuento en tu compra. Síguelos en sus redes face book, instagram y twitter como jaboneradongato para mantenerte informado.   2. Papelón en la Pava por Juan Zaragoza y Jorge Colberg 3.⁠ ⁠Primer choque entre la gobernadora electa y Pipo Pierluisi  BRIGHTINTERNATIONALINVESTMENTS.COM   Bright International Investments ofrece servicios relacionados a las finanzas. Específicamente creamos y manejamos carteras de portafolios de inversión a clientes particulares que deseen invertir su dinero en la Bolsa de Valores de Nueva York. Tú haces la inversión y nosotros nos encargamos del resto. Este 2024 sácale dinero a tu dinero y hazte cargo de tu futuro. ¡Bright International Investments es tu solución! ¡Por un futuro brillante! Para más información visita brightinternationalinvestments.com .    4.⁠ ⁠Reflexión post mortem Alianza Video de Nogales: https://x.com/radioislatv/status/1857422972396425434  Suscríbete a nuestro Patreon y recibe contenido exclusivo, artículos: https://patreon.com/puestospalproblemaSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

En este episodio: analizamos la semana tras los endosos de Nydia Velázquez y AOC a la Alianza. También, llega Guillermo Guasp a explicarnos cómo votar sin dañar la papeleta y analizamos las carreras en el Distrito de Guayama. - Si fueras partes de nuestro patreon, hubieras escuchado este episodio ayer sábado. ¡Únete a la mejor comunidad del internet boricua en patreon.com/puestospalproblema! - Presentado por el mejor internet de Puerto Rico, y su nuevo servicio de 10GB de velocidad - AeronetPR.com. Cambiate ahora llamando al 787 273 4143.  El año que viene nos vamos para Perú. Reserva ahora con $200 en podcastppp.com. Nuestros Patroncitos PYMES de hoy: Durante más de 25 años, Volkswagen Kennedy ha sido su concesionario en Puerto Rico con una gran reputación basada en la honestidad y calidad. Nuestra conveniente ubicación en la avenida Kennedy en San Juan nos convierte en el concesionario preferido tanto para adquirir tu Volkswagen nuevo, usado certificado y a la vez también puedes confiar en nuestro servicio y repuestos ya que tenemos el mayor inventario de repuestos originales Volkswagen. Contamos con los mejores técnicos certificados de todo Puerto Rico.  ¡Ven y visítanos! Volkswagen Kennedy – El Original - 787-782-4039. Bright International Investments ofrece servicios relacionados a las finanzas. Específicamente creamos y manejamos carteras de portafolios de inversión a clientes particulares que deseen invertir su dinero en la Bolsa de Valores de Nueva York. Tú haces la inversión y nosotros nos encargamos del resto. Este 2024 sácale dinero a tu dinero y hazte cargo de tu futuro. ¡Bright International Investments es tu solución! ¡Por un futuro brillante! Para más información visita brightinternationalinvestments.com.    Matrix Patent Agency se dedica a preparar y radicar aplicaciones de Patentes (de Invención diría la RAE), el documento que emite el USPTO y el cual protege sus derechos sobre 'Inventos' en EE. UU. (y extensiones para protección Global). El principal de Matrix se llama Luis Figarella, PE y Agente de Patentes Registrado en el USPTO (Reg. # 58,300).  Los agentes hacemos lo mismo que los abogados de patentes en lo que llamamos el “prosecution” (preparar, radicar y si, ‘negociar' con el Examinador del USPTO). Si ha pensado alguna ves proteger su ‘invento', me deja saber y vemos si se puede hacer algo o no. Desde que Matrix comenzó en el 2006, tengo sobre 115 patentes tramitadas y emitidas para mis clientes, 47 de ellas a clientes en PR. 603.557.8420 (C)  603.821.7400 (O) luis@mxpatent.com. Ecorganic Boutique, una empresa puertorriqueña que vende todo tipo de productos naturales y orgánicos para el hogar y para las personas, niños, niñas y mascotas. En Ecorganic encontrarás las mejores marcas, sin ingredientes tóxicos ni dañinos para el ambiente. Cupón de descuento para los que sintonizan PPP: 15% de descuento código: PPP. Conoce sus productos ecorganicboutique.com. Síguelos en las redes sociales como Ecorganic Boutique. Gracias Ecorganic Boutique. Suscríbete a nuestro Patreon y recibe contenido exclusivo, artículos: https://patreon.com/puestospalproblemaSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.