Week 5 Blog #3: Evaluation of Two Additional Patents and their Claims

US 7,922,031 B1 – Insulator Sleeve for a Beverage Container:

• Priority Date: March 1^st, 2006
• Background: The insulator sleeve provides a reusable beverage sleeve for a frusto-conical beverage cup, rendering prior art disposable sleeves unnecessary.
• Anticipation and Obviousness: The issue that arises with this patent is all it simply does is transform the traditional disposable beverage sleeve into it being reusable. However, this claimed invention couldn’t be ruled as anticipated due to the structure of its claims as no one had known about or used the invention before the patent had been put into place. What makes this invention novel is the description of it provided in claim #1. The unique structure of the invention listed in claim #1 through describing the invention as “having an inside diameter sufficient to allow at least partial insertion of the inner sleeve within the outer sleeve such that the inner and outer sleeve are coaxially aligned” is a disclosure that is not available as prior art. Furthermore, the construction, design, and materials utilized that are described in the later claims differentiate this invention from any predecessor or similar inventions created before. Therefore, while this invention may not be very novel, it nonetheless possesses validity due to the unique nature of its claims.

US 2,661,889 A – Thermal Coffee Cup:

• Priority Date: July 20, 1948
• Background: The thermal coffee cup was designed to provide a container adapted to receive a coffee cup which would normally be too hot to handle whereby the inner coffee cup would be insulated from the hand.
• Anticipation and Obviousness: There is only 1 claim to this invention, but what it presents is a design that is both novel and non-obvious. This claim divulges into the design of the overall product and how each component works with each to ensure that the invention works. While simple, this invention is one that cannot be anticipated over a disclosure that is available as prior art as nothing of its kind in thermal beverage insulating technology had existed before. The one claim describes how this invention was designed to provide a cover cap with a lip so the contents of the cup could be kept covered and heated and the purpose of this was to provide a combined holder and coffee cup which was convenient and efficient for manufacture and use. Therefore, the novelty and non-obvious nature of this invention reinforces the validity of the patent.

Week 5 Blog #2: My Personal View on Anticipation and Obviousness

US 6,343,735 B1 - The Insulating Sleeve:

• The validity of this patent can be upheld as this is an invention that it quite novel. Traditionally, foam cups had been utilized to protect consumers from the heat emitted by a cup so this idea can be considered non-obvious as it differentiates itself from the foam cup and traditional sleeve.

US 2,661,889 A – Thermal Coffee Cup:

• The validity of this patent can be upheld as this invention, when it was created in the 1940s, was completely new as there had not existed an invention that had been patented before to carry hot beverages. Due to its widespread use, non-obvious nature, and lack of prior art at the time, this patent had substantially strong validity.

US 8,251,277 B2 – Thermal Sleeve, Method for Manufacturing a Thermal Sleeve, and Combination Cup and Thermal Sleeve:

• The validity of this patent is not as strong due to the obvious nature of the entire invention. It simply expands on the thermal, insulating sleeve patented earlier so its close relation to the prior art makes it simple to anticipate its purpose and use. 

US 7,922,031 B1 – Insulator Sleeve for a Beverage Container:

• The obviousness of the patent weakens the validity of this as it simply allows for the sleeve to be reusable. Its lack of differentiation makes it prone to becoming invalidated in light of evidence suggesting its obviousness and lack of invention.

US 8,118,189 B2 – Temperature-Indicating Sleeve and Related Container:

• The validity of this patent is very strong due to the fact that it introduces the new technology of allowing consumers to know the temperature of their beverage. Due to its novelty, the non-obvious nature of this patent allows for the enforceability of this patent.

US 6,152,363 A - Sleeve Construction for Improved Paperboard Cup Insulation:

• Due to the new technology of hot-melt glue dots, the validity of this patent can be established as it incorporates a new solution for thermal insulation. The non-obvious factor established by this technology is what maintains the validity of the patent.

US 20080078824 A1 – Beverage Cup Sleeving System and Method:

• The ability for users to insulate both hot and cold beverages was a new technology that makes this patent quite non-obvious. Due to its non-obvious nature and novelty, the validity of this patent is upheld as the argument behind the extra features that this technology incorporates is its primary defense.

US 20100019023 A1 – Protective Sleeve:

• While the overall technology is rather standard and is not relatively new, the “arch” design is the feature that makes this patent quite novel. Due to the overall change in design, the validity of this patent can be defended, as the prior art did not possess such a feature.

US 20140151385 A1 – Hot and Cold Cup Sleeve:

• The sleeve for hot and cold beverages was a relatively new technology making its validity quite strong due to its novelty and non-obvious nature.

Week 5 Blog #1: An Overview of Beverage Technology Patents

US 6,343,735 B1 - The Insulating Sleeve:

• Filed on May 4^th, 2000 and patented on February 5^th, 2002, the insulating sleeve was designed for insulating a user’s hand from a hot beverage cup.
• The patent describes that for years, foamed plastic was utilized for cups meant for hot beverages, but due to environmental reason, foamed plastic had fallen into disfavor.
• The insulating sleeve provides an economical and disposable service that presents a user with a gripping surface that remains at a comfortable temperature no matter what the temperature of the liquid within the container.
• The technology behind this featured first and second wing portions extending outwardly from the container side wall and spaced apart therefrom by spacer elements to from air gaps between the wing portion and the cup.
• The drawings of this were for the purpose of illustrating several preferred embodiments of the invention only and this invention features 18 claims

US 2,661,889 A – Thermal Coffee Cup:

• Filed on July 20, 1948 and patented on December 8, 1953, the thermal coffee cup was designed to provide a container adapted to receive a coffee cup which would normally be too hot to handle whereby the inner coffee cup would be insulated from the hand.
• This was designed to provide a cover cap with a lip so the contents of the cup could be kept covered and heated and the purpose of this was to provide a combined holder and coffee cup which was convenient and efficient for manufacture and use.
• 4 diagrams are utilized and there exists only 1 claim describing the design of the invention thoroughly.

US 8,251,277 B1 – Thermal Sleeve, Method for Manufacturing a Thermal Sleeve, and Combination Cup and Thermal Sleeve:

• Filed on April 15, 2005 and patented on August 28, 2012, the thermal sleeve was designed as a cup sleeve for wrapping a cup and providing thermal insulation.
• The cup sleeve includes a creped paper product having a first end, a second end, a first cup opening, and a second cup opening, and an adhesive holding the first end and the second end together to form a wrap wherein the wrap is sized to enclose a cup.
• The advantage behind using cup sleeves is the reduction of paper while achieving a desired level of protection from heat.
• The 3 drawings provide perspective and sectional views of the cup sleeve in separate configurations and of the laminate structure.
• There exist 13 claims describing the dimensions and material utilized for the production of the cup sleeve.

US 7,922,031 B1 –Insulator Sleeve for a Beverage Container:

• Filed on March 1, 2006 and patented on April 12, 2011, the insulator sleeve provides a reusable beverage sleeve for a frusto-conical beverage cup, rendering prior art disposable sleeves unnecessary.
• This consists of at least a portion of the outer sleeve being transparent and including a textured gripping surface and a customized inner sleeve that may be marked to indicate a favorite drink of the user.
• This sleeve has the ability to prove more economical in regards to production compared to disposable sleeves and this is even more effective at insulating a consumers hand from the heat of a hot beverage than a disposable sleeve alone.
• This patent features 9 drawings and 13 claims.

US 8,118,189 B2 – Temperature-Indicating Sleeve and Related Container:

• Filed on December 14, 2007 and patented on February 21, 2012, the temperature-indicating sleeve is a sleeve with a temperature indicator in or on the sidewall, thereof, which is visible from outside the sleeve.
• The sleeves comprises of a temperature indicator on the sleeve wall capable of determining a temperature of contents of he container to an accuracy of within about 4 degrees Fahrenheit and a container is provided with the sleeve which has a temperature sensitive indicator that indicates the temperature, temperature range, or degree of hotness or coldness of the contents therein.
• This allows for consumers to make an individual decision as to what temperature, temperature range or degree of hotness or coldness is best for them to consume the contents of the cup or container.
• This patent features 11 drawings and 18 claims.

US 6,152,363 – Sleeve Construction for Improved Paperboard Cup Insulation:

• Filed on May 3, 1999 and patented on November 28, 2000, this invention relates to the construction of sleeves for use with paperboard cups.
• This employs a paperboard sleeve backed with hot-melt glue dots, which are used to improve the insulating characteristics of a paperboard cup to the same level of common polystyrene cups.
• The lightness in weight, ease of assembly, good durability, and excellent insulation characteristics makes the quality of this invention considerably higher than achieved in prior, known sleeve constructions.
• This patent features 5 drawings and 5 claims.

US 20080078824 A1 – Beverage Cup Sleeving System and Method:

• Filed on August 23, 2007 and patented on April 3, 2008, this invention is a cup insulating system, comprising of a layer of elastomer formed into a seamless conical sleeve which has an upper opening and a lower opening, wherein the upper opening is configured for receiving a beverage cup.
• This provides an insulating cup sleeve that is effective when wetted, effective against high and low temperatures, is reusable and easily manufactured.
• Possesses multiple layers with elastomerics such as silicon and rubber for insulation and features a smooth surface with distributed raised surfaces.
• The 18 claims made discuss the purpose and production of the sleeving system with the multiple components that comprise of the method and the drawings demonstrate the benefits and simplicity of the system.

US 20100019023 A1 – Protective Sleeve:

• Filed on July 21, 2009 and patented on January 28, 2010, the sleeve is disclosed as having a unique arch-like shape that facilitates manufacturing material efficiency and therefore reduces material costs and environmental waste.
• The sleeve, when unassembled and laid flat, is a blank with top and bottom edges, which have an arch-like formation, created by peaks and troughs.
•  The 6 diagrams presented illustrate the sleeve from different views and a diagram of making a sleeve while the claims describe the production and utilization of the sleeve.

US 20140151385 A1 – Hot and Cold Cup Sleeve:

• Filed on February 6, 2014 and patented on June 5, 2014, this invention is a sleeve for use with hot or cold beverage cups.
• The sleeve is composed of three layers: the inner layer is water-absorbent, the outer layer is made of a synthetic fabric to keep the hand dry, and the outer layers are adhered together with a polyethylene film, which is not visible after fabrication.
• The sleeve is extremely lightweight, thin, inexpensive, and disposable and the diagrams provided highlight its features and simple assembly.
• Its 12 claims make clear what the purpose behind this sleeve is, how it differentiates itself from prior art, and the production of the sleeve. 

Week 3 Blog #3: The Apple vs. Samsung Patent Litigation

In February of 2012, Apple took Samsung to court claiming that Samsung had ripped off several patented aspects of the iPhone, including the slide-to-unlock feature, and demanded a "preliminary injunction" to stop Samsung from selling the new phone, the Galaxy Nexus, that they were releasing at the time. One week later, Samsung would sue Apple in multiple countries and countersued Apple's initial lawsuit under the allegation that Apple was attempting to disrupt competition. Hundreds of patents were brought up in cases around the world as judges asked the companies to take patents out of the cases to make them more manageable. However, due to the fact that all these cases involved preliminary injunctions, the firms were allowed to continue offering the "infringing" products for sales while the disputes continued in the courts.

As the dispute raged on between the two companies, rulings became complicated and hard to understand. In multiple instances, while a lower court ruled in favor of both parties on several occasions, a simple appeal to a higher court threw out the earlier rulings. For example, the USPTO had claimed that Apple's "rubber band" patent was valid, but then proceeded to toss out the patent shortly afterwards, further complicating the entire process. Eventually, Apple's win the U.S. recently in the past year could see the company net close to a billion dollars and has caused Samsung to reason that it's easier to simply concede to Apple's hegemony in certain markets than to fight on all fronts.

Speaking specifically to the "slide-to-unlock" feature, a judge in California ruled that while Samsung infringed on Apple's slide-to-unlock patent, the infringement was not willful. Judge Lucy Koh determined that Apple did not clear and convincing evidence that Samsung acted despite the likelihood that its actions could infringe a valid patent.

Week 3 Blog #2: Claim #1 of the "Slide to Unlock" Patent

Essentially, Claim #1 for the "Slide to Unlock" patent describes the general process behind how exactly the entire concept works for the product. Essentially, the purpose behind the product is to un-lock specifically a hand-held electrical device with a display that works with touch. The product senses an individual making contact with a specific image on the display screen and maintaining contact with this image throughout the full process of sliding this image from the first predefined location to the predefined unlock location on the display.

This claim specifies what exactly the unlock image is, what its purpose is for and how it affects the whole unlocking process of the electrical device. The unlock image is the primary driver behind the entire unlocking procedure as its movement allows for the procedure to work and the individual must interact with it for the purpose of the product to be achieved.

Week 3 Blog #1: The Logic Behind the Predictions

The Logic Behind My Top 5 From Professor Lavian's List 

1.    "This 'telephone' has too many shortcomings to be seriously considered as a means of communication. The device is inherently of no value to us" - Western Union internal memo, 1876.

I believe this memo highlights why you should never come to a conclusion so quickly when something is initially produced. It’s always easy to dismiss a product when it is first produced, but this is the wrong approach whenever observing something radically new because of the simple fact that you never know what the future holds for this product. There may be flaws in a product, but to call it of “no value” so quickly highlights a certain level of ignorance that no entrepreneurial mind should hold.

2.  "Everyone acquainted with the subject will recognize it as a conspicuous failure." - Henry Morton, president of the Stevens Institute of Technology, on Edison's light bulb, 1880.

I believe that Mr. Morton simply could not see the potential for Edison’s light bulb. Initially with the light bulb, there were many technical difficulties in getting the entire program started but the potential was so obvious. That is what bothers me with Mr. Morton’s quote. The human race had struggled so long to find light in darkness and the fact that Edison’s light bulb held the solution to it all confuses me as to why Mr. Morton did not see how this invention addressed a fundamental problem that had existed for so many years.

3.  "The horse is here to stay but the automobile is only a novelty - a fad." - The president of the Michigan Savings Bank advising Henry Ford's lawyer not to invest in the Ford Motor Co., 1903"

At that in point in time, the idea of the automobile was so radical, it somewhat makes sense for someone to doubt its potential. The world had relied on natural beings so long for transportation that inventions such as the railroad and eventually the automobile were deemed as simply temporary novelties. The automobile in particular because of its limited capacity in terms of carrying people and goods when compared to trains. However, its undeniably more practical and efficient uses when compared to the horse should have made it clear to this gentlemen how irrational his statement sounded.

4.  "If excessive smoking actually plays a role in the production of lung cancer, it seems to be a minor one." - W.C. Heuper, National Cancer Institute, 1954.

This quote captures the growth of scientific knowledge in such a short period of time. The fact we did not have the medical technologies that we do today and people for centuries had smoked excessively led to the belief that smoking was not whatsoever harmful. This quote highlights how far we have come as a society in terms of healthcare and how far we still need to go to make sure we don’t come to improper assumptions such as the ones we made in the past.

5.  "No, it will make war impossible." - Hiram Maxim, inventor of the machine gun, in response to the question.

The reason behind this selection was because of the tragic irony behind this statement, the fact that the inventor of the machine gun, Hiram Maxim, actually increased the deadliness of war rather than making it simply impossible. Since the invention of the machine gun, war has remained a constant, but the fatalities surrounding it have worsened. The irony behind this statement is what makes it so compelling and ludicrous.

The Logic Behind My Own Top 5

1.  “We will never make a 32 bit operating system.” - Bill Gates, 1989

I thought this statement was somewhat ridiculous as Bill Gates was leading the computer revolution at the time and the fact that the advance from the 8-bit to the 16-bit had just been made so it seemed subsequent developments were only logical. The 32-bit operating system was inevitable so for Mr. Gates to proclaim that the technology could not evolve further did not make much sense at the time.

2.  “Computers in the future may weigh no more than 1.5 tons.” – Popular Mechanics, 1949.

Since the first general-purpose electronic computer, the ENIAC, which was completed in 1947 weighed almost 30 tons at the time, it made sense for the magazine to predict 1.5 tons would be the greatest amount that future computers would weigh. While that may have been a bit too generous of a margin, Popular Mechanics had the insight to see computers would be consistently developed and tinkered with to be more efficient in the future.

3.  “Home Taping Is Killing Music” - A 1980s campaign by the BPI claiming that people recording music off the radio onto cassette would destroy the music industry.

In this instance I think the BPI was frightened that the influence of the radio would die with the growth of the cassette. Such a prediction, while a bit extreme, does make a good case in the sense that the role of the radio has diminished as the cassette has evolved into the digital age with the streaming of music. However, rather than killing music, the cassette elevated music to levels never seen before and jumpstarted the digitization of the music industry as it is today.

4.  “Stocks have reached what looks like a permanently high plateau” - Irving Fisher, economics professor at Yale University, September 1929

Professor Fisher unfortunately became so enamored with the continuous growth of the American economy that he forgot one of the most basic elements taught by economics: that the economy operates in a cycle. What comes up must come down and the stock market crash highlighted this in an extreme way. Furthermore, to claim that there is a plateau also suggests Professor Fisher did not believe in the economy to expand even further in greater years which is somewhat strange as the economy consistently reaches greater and greater heights as technology and society develop through the years as proven by precedent.

5.  “Who the hell wants to hear actors talk?” - Harry M. Warner, co-founder of Warner Brothers, 1926.

      

I find Mr. Warner’s statement to be quite puzzling, as I don’t understand why he did not see the potential in expanding movie production with speech. Such technology at the time simply sounded too radical, but the practicality behind it and how it would revolutionize and make movies so much more influential makes me confused as to why Mr. Warner would not want actors to talk. Speech, while radical at the time, had potential to completely change the entire filmmaking and producing atmosphere and it has.

Week 2: My New Top 10 Inventions List and Exploring My Passion for the Semiconductor Industry

When it came to re-evaluating my top ten inventions, it came down to TWO specific sets of criteria:

1. Similarity to my peers in terms of selection of inventions
2. Whether my invention could be deemed as "less important" compared to those listed by my peers.

All in all, when looking at my list, I noticed seven specific inventions that seemed to be quite popular amongst my peers. These inventions were:

1. The Printing Press
2. The Mobile Phone
3. The Internet
4. The Computer
5. The Telephone
6. The Automobile
7. The Incandescent Lightbulb

These seven items can be found on the majority of lists for most people and I believe the socio-economic impact of these inventions specifically makes them so popular and draws the consensus of most of my peers.

The three new inventions that I decided to add to my list were 

1. The Airplane
2. Plumbing 
3. Anesthesia

Specifically, I replaced the microwave oven, the toilet, and the television to add these inventions. While those previous three were indeed important towards the development of the modern world, after listening to the arguments of some of my peers, I have come to the conclusion that the impact of these three different inventions from the ones I previously listed are much more powerful and have more rapidly changed the world. I believe the health impacts of plumbing and anesthesia have revolutionized the medical field and allowed for greater life expectancy and scientific growth and the cultural impact of the airplane has truly ushered in an era of globalization. 

This next blog post of mine focuses on the impact of semiconductors. I hope to gain more exposure into this industry through this class because I see semiconductors as the path to explaining the foundations of our modern technology and driving the future of technological growth. In a seemingly "software era", I am dismayed that many of my peers tend to ignore the role of semiconductors and the part they have played in fueling this rapid technological development. I truly hope that this class touches upon this specific industry in certain instances so I can learn more about the foundation of the technological revolution that we are in the midst of today.