April 29, 2008

Carrefour can't be searched in China

Some guys found that 家乐福(Carrefour) can't be searched in China. I tried to search 家乐福 in baidu.com, google.cn, and yahoo.com.cn and got the below results.

The Chinese in the above red box is "The search results may relate to contents that do not comply with the laws and thus are not displayed "

The search results of google.cn and yahoo.com.cn are similar to that of baidu.com.

I guess this is because of the recent campaign of boycotting Carrefour in China. Perhaps the Chinese government does not want to see that more and more Chinese discuss the boycott campaign event and spread messages calling for joining in the boycotting campaign.

April 28, 2008

two trains crashed in China

Today's news said that two trains, T195 and 5034, crashed in Zibo, Shandong province, China. 70 were killed and 400 more were injured. The reasons are unknown.

If it were happened in Xinjiang (新疆) or Tibet(西藏), I would have thought it was caused by terrorists who had been seeking independence of Xinjiang or Tibet. Hopefully it was not and I hope the Beijing Olympic Games will be held in peace.

All right, let's talk about trains in China. Trains are the most often used vehicle in China for traveling, cargo transporting etc. The following picture is China's most advanced train: Dongchezu (动车组) train or CRH (china railway highspeed) train. The CRH train looks like a Japan's bullet train in the head and can travel at the speed of 300 km per hour.

However, the CRH trains are newly developed and are not of broad use. And the trains in the below picture are commonly used in China and usually run at the speed of 100~200 km per hour.

Due to China's large population, the trains are always crowded, especially during the public holiday period, such as Chinese new year-Spring Festival. So, for foreigners, it is not a good choice to travel by train except that you want to experience a common Chinese's pain.

April 21, 2008

css入门

http://aetherx.blogspot.com/2007/07/css.html

http://qzjackie.blogspot.com/2006/12/csscss.html

http://sunr.blogspot.com/2006/10/blogger-betablogger-beta.html

http://www.enet.com.cn/eschool/zhuanti/css/day1/3.html

http://www.dreamdu.com/css/novice/

http://hislog.blogspot.com/2007/02/blogger.html?showComment=1185696720000

学习修改模板

我想修改一下现在这个模板，现在这个在官方模板基础上小做修改的模板不够个性化和人性化，说干就干，ccs吧

April 12, 2008

glossary of patent law terms

Teach Toward-Teach Away: A prior art reference that suggests or points in the direction of the present invention is said to teach toward the invention and is evidence that the invention is obvious. A prior-art reference that diverges and points in a technical direction away from the present invention is evidence that the invention is unobvious. Prior art must be looked at in its entirety.

Teach: To inform and instruct by way of the documents making up the prior art. The prior art references teach the technology disclosed in them or revealed by them.

Teaching Away: The situation in which a prior art reference suggests that a claimed invention is not possible.

Technical Field: The field of art to which the invention pertains.

Technology Manager: The person in a public sector or private sector organization who is responsible for managing the intellectual property of the organization. Various titles are used for the position, including Technology-Transfer Officer, Licensing Associate, etc. The Association of University Technology Managers (AUTM) has over 1,200 members. Another such organization, the Licensing Executives Society (LES), has over 6,000 members worldwide.

Term of Patent: The maximum number of years that the monopoly rights conferred by the grant of a patent may last.

Terminal Disclaimer: A document filed with the USPTO by an applicant, assignee or patent attorney or agent wherein a terminal portion of the normal term of the patent is given up.

Terminal Disclaimer: Where an obviousness-type double patenting rejection has occurred, an applicant may file a document indicating that the term of the second patent will end upon expiration of the first patent to issue.

Title of Invention: A brief but technically accurate name for an invention.

Trade Name: A name used to identify a business entity.

Trade Secret: Information kept secret by an organization for the purpose of maintaining a competitive advantage.

Trademark: A word, name, symbol, or device, or any combination thereof, used by a manufacturer or by a vendor in connection with a product.

Traverse: To dispute the decision of an examiner. In proceedings before the USPTO, failing to traverse an examiner's reliance on alleged "common knowledge" or information that is alleged to be "well known" in the art can result in the allegation becoming an admission, and, hence, "fact" even though it is no true.

OVERVIEW OF THE DOE AND STATUTORY EQUIVALENTS

copyright © Glen Belvis

Although the doctrine of equivalents is a substantially different doctrine from "equivalents" under §112, ¶ 6, these doctrines have been, and will continue to be, intertwined in infringement analyses. The doctrine of equivalents is a judicially created doctrine that is expansive in nature. This doctrine expands the scope of patent protection beyond the Literal words of the claims. On the other hand, "equivalents" tinder § 112, ¶ 6 is statutory and is a narrowing doctrine that restricts the scope of protection afforded the patentee.

Background or prior art discussion

copyright © Karl Rackette

• The way in which you describe the problems with the prior art influences the way in which the invention will be understood.

• If you identify problems in the prior art, the assumption is that your invention solves them all.

• Consequently, something which does not solve all the problems may be considered not to be covered by the claims of the patent. So,
make it clear if the invention only solves some of the problems. It is often better not to mention problems which remain unsolved.

• If you reduce a problem but don't (always) eliminate it, make this clear.

• The identification in the description of advantages of the invention can be very helpful in showing the invention in a good light.

• You should not suggest that the invention always provides all the advantages, unless you want to restrict the protection of the patent to
things which do this.

• Associate the advantage(s) with the features which give that advantage(s).

Patent Enforceability:Increasing the Odds

copyright © Hung H. Bui

Background of the Invention (Not required under MPEP and 37 CFR §1.73)

Disadvantages:
(1) Can be used as admissions of prior art
(2) Can be used to limit claim construction or to show disclaimer of claim scope

Advantages:
(1) Can effectively set up the story of the invention, i.e., theenvironment of the invention, and the long-felt need
(2) Can support the patentability of claims

-Keep the Background of the Invention section short and broadly worded
* Discuss only what you want to overcome
-Avoid discussion of prior art references
* File IDS, rather characterizing prior art to avoid disclaimer of claim scope
-Avoid discussion of disadvantages of other embodiments to distinguish the invention as infringers may use the other embodiments to avoid infringement. See Wireless Agents LLC v. Sony Ericsson, 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 18933 (Fed. Cir. July 2006)

Example: Wireless Agents LLC v. Sony Ericsson, 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 18933 (Fed. Cir. July 2006)
-Background of the Invention: Discussed extensively disadvantages of a standard 12-digit keypad used in mobile phones
-Claim: Defined an "alphanumeric keyboard"
-Accused device (Sony): Used a standard 12-digit keypad
-No infringement, since the Background of the Invention section made clear that the invention does notinclude a 12-digit keypad, even though the claims literally read on the accused device

Note: boilerplate language such as "various modifications of the disclosed embodiments as well as alternative embodiments of the invention will become apparent to persons skilled in the art"cannotsave the disclaimer of claim scope in the Background of the Invention section

April 10, 2008

厦门小吃

在短短的3天厦门之行中，有幸吃到了黄则和的沙茶面和土笋冻。沙茶面味道一般，土笋冻倒是很很可口，和上图不同，地摊上的土笋冻冰凉冰凉的，好像冰过。不过当时不想吃东西，只吃了一口，可惜。在网上baidu了一下，似乎没发现深圳有买土笋冻的地方。
不过这么好吃的土笋冻居然是一种海里的虫子做的，要是事先看了原料，估计一定不吃。

Patentability (Dan Hussain)

copyright © Dan Hussain

•Basis for ex parte rejection under 102(g)(1) if:
(1) Subject matter at issue has been actually (NOT constructively) reduced to practice (conception alone is insufficient) by another before the applicant's invention, and
(2) There has been no abandonment, suppression or concealment

•Actual reduction to practice requires:
(1) the party constructed an embodiment or performed a process that met every element of the interference count, and
(2) the embodiment or process operated for its intended purpose. Evans v. Eaton, 204 F.3d 1094, 1097 (Fed. Cir. 2000)

•"Abandoned, suppressed, or concealed" = within a reasonable time after conception and reduction to practice, no steps are taken to make the invention publicly known; e.g., failure to file a patent application, to describe the invention in a publicly disseminated document, or to use the invention publicly. Correge v. Murphy, 705 F.2d 1326, 1330 (Fed. Cir. 1983).

Suppression or concealment need not be attributed to the inventor (e.g., employee, assignee, or attorney)

how to write a patent application

copyright © Jeffrey G. Sheldon
Although the USPTO recommends that this section include a “field of the invention” and a “description of the related art,” neither section should be included: the breadth of the stated field can impact the scope of the patent and/or relevant prior art, and the “description of the related art” may imply all discussed references are valid and relevant prior art – in fact, the background section should not admit anything as prior art unless this is unquestionable – instead, the background section should be a “sales pitch” for the invention, suggesting a desperate need for improvement in a technological art – the section can be used to characterize other references as “attempts to address these problems,” but should be described in detail only by noting their continuing deficiencies (however, the applicant may not make “disparaging” comments about the prior art; this is especially true of the applicant’s prior designs, because such statements could be considered product flaws in litigation over the prior designs) – the conclusion should summarize the need for the invention (“for the foregoing reasons, there is a need for a machine that can inexpensively produce perfectly spherical ball bearings”)

Idle Panda