​​Patently Strategic - Patent Strategy for Startups

By: Aurora Patent Consulting | Ashley Sloat Ph.D.
  • Summary

  • A patent focused podcast for inventors, founders, and IP professionals, covering the finer points, sharp edges, and nuances of startup patent strategy. Each monthly episode will feature a round-table style discussion amongst experts in the field of patenting. Patently Strategic is brought to you by Aurora Consulting, a patent strategy boutique that specializes in working with early stage life science, medical​ device, digital health, and software companies to develop valuable patent portfolios through highly tailored, comprehensive strategies.
    © 2025 Aurora Consulting LLC
    Show More Show Less
Episodes
  • Dealing with Rejection: Overcoming 101, 102, 103, and 112
    Feb 6 2025

    Send us a text

    So, your patent application got rejected. Now what?

    In this month’s episode, we’re talking about rejection. Specifically, the type that comes from the patent office in the form of an intimidating sounding three-digit number when your application gets denied by an examiner.

    Some time after submitting your application, it goes into a process with the patent office called examination. This is the part of your patent’s prosecution journey where an examiner reviews your application for conformance to technical and legal requirements. If – and usually when – the examiner finds a problem, they will issue an office action that contains specific reasons for the rejection. You then have the opportunity to respond to and overcome the rejection, using various strategies we’ll explore today.

    Reasons for rejection fall under four sections of U.S. Statute, Title 35. Sections 101, 102, 103, and 112 dictate that patents must be eligible, useful, novel, nonobvious, and enabled (or properly described). Patents can be rejected or later invalidated if one or more of the claims are determined to be otherwise.

    Rejection on the basis of these four statutes is fortunately just the beginning of the delicate process of negotiating this important exchange that has promoted and enabled our innovation economy since the dawn of our country. Patent application rejection is common, expected, and can be used very strategically – but perhaps counterintuitively – to end up with the broadest possible protection, while also making sure there’s something in it for the public!

    ** Episode Overview **

    In today’s episode, Patent Office Relationship Guru Daniel Wright leads a discussion with our all-star patent panel, delving deeply into defining, coping with, and then dealing with patent application rejection. Along the way, Dan and the panel discuss:

    ⦿ Why patent applications are rejected.
    ⦿ The specific types of rejection.
    ⦿ Strategies for how to overcome each, including some wonderful insider insights specifically on how to work with examiners on the human level to overcome rejection.

    ** Mossoff Minute: Patents Aren't Monopolies **

    In this month’s minute, Professor Adam Mossoff debunks the myth that patents in the United States are monopolies that impede innovation and block economic growth.

    ** Referenced Links **

    ⦿ Apply to work at Aurora: https://www.aurorapatents.com/careers-patent-agent.html
    ⦿ Patent Anatomy: https://www.aurorapatents.com/blog/patent-anatomy-whats-in-a-patent

    ** Follow Aurora Patents **

    ⦿ Home: https://www.aurorapatents.com/
    ⦿ Twitter: https://twitter.com/AuroraPatents
    ⦿ LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/aurora-cg/
    ⦿ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/aurorapatents/
    ⦿ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/aurorapatents/
    ⦿ TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@aurorapatents
    ⦿ YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@aurorapatents/

    Show More Show Less
    1 hr and 16 mins
  • Patent Case Law Review: Obviousness
    Dec 6 2024

    Send us a text

    An invention cannot be patented if the differences between your claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was conceived. Determining obviousness – and the validity of your patent – is more than simply establishing that the invention doesn’t already exist and that it isn’t documented elsewhere. Its conception must also not have otherwise been obvious to those in the field at the time.

    If you’re thinking that sounds awfully subjective in the present and highly susceptible to hindsight bias in the future, you’d be right. Beyond being one of the four main drivers for patent application rejection at examination time, obviousness is also one of the primary vectors used by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board for invalidating patents via Inter Partes Review, so it’s essential to get this right so as to limit your patent’s potential invalidation surface area.

    ** Episode Overview **

    Kristen Hansen, Patent Strategy Specialist at Aurora, and Dr. David Jackrel, President of Jackrel Consulting, lead today’s two-part discussion with our all-star panel, dissecting recent court decisions impacting the core patenting issue of obviousness. In breaking this all down in terms of how obviousness has been playing out in the courts, Dave, Kristen, and the panel discuss:

    ⦿ Inter Partes Review and how some PTAB strategy deviates from conventional patenting wisdom when it comes to obviousness.
    ⦿ Recent obviousness case law decisions.
    ⦿ Practice tips related to obviousness including analysis of how previously invalidated claims impact future claims, the dangers of being your own lexicographer, and the strategic importance of drafting backup positions in your specification.

    ** Mossoff Minute: PREVAIL Advances **

    In this month's Mossoff Minute, Professor Adam Mossoff discusses some incredibly exciting news about the PREVAIL Act, which is designed to bring much overdue reform to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.

    ** Follow Aurora Patents **

    ⦿ Home: https://www.aurorapatents.com/
    ⦿ Twitter: https://twitter.com/AuroraPatents
    ⦿ LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/aurora-cg/
    ⦿ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/aurorapatents/
    ⦿ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/aurorapatents/
    ⦿ TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@aurorapatents
    ⦿ YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@aurorapatents/

    Show More Show Less
    1 hr and 12 mins
  • Petition Practice: Correcting PTO Errors With Your Patent
    Nov 5 2024

    Send us a text

    Patent examiners can make mistakes. Patent office clerks can misfile paperwork and cause procedural errors. The software tools, document formats like DOCX, and the IT systems your application passes through can have bugs. What recourse do you have when quality issues creep in at this stage? This is where petition practice, fortunately, comes to the rescue.

    ** Quality Patents Part 5 **

    This is our final episode in a multi-part series focused on quality patents. The prior four episodes have all been about managing quality for everything in your immediate control. Steps you and your practitioner should be taking before and after your patent is granted. But what about the last mile, where you’re turning your carefully crafted patent application over to the patent office for examination and prosecution?

    Patent petition practice is the process of filing formal requests, referred to as “petitions,” with the USPTO or other relevant patent offices to address procedural and administrative issues that can arise during the patent application process. Filing petitions can be an essential step to correct course when rules are misapplied, procedural errors occur, administrative actions need to be reversed, or deadlines are missed.

    ** Guest Hosts: Julie Burke and Michael Spector **

    Julie Burke is a registered patent agent and former USPTO employee with 20 years of experience at the patent office. Julie rose up at the PTO to become a Quality Assurance Specialist – the type of manager you’d call when your case got off track. During this time, she handled more than 900 petitions at the patent office! After leaving the PTO, she founded her own consulting company, IP Quality Pro LLC, where she helps patent attorneys navigate complex situations in the patent system to protect their inventor’s ideas. This experience from both sides of the petition practice table has given Julie a level of access, experience, and insights shared by few in the industry. Julie is also presently an advisor for Petition.ai, the first searchable database of US patent prosecution petitions and associated documents. Julie is joined by the co-founder of Petition.ai, Michael Spector.

    ** Discussed Links **

    ⦿ Quality Patents Part 1: https://www.aurorapatents.com/blog/quality-patents
    ⦿ Quality Patents Part 2: https://www.aurorapatents.com/blog/ptab-survival-guide
    ⦿ Quality Patents Part 3: https://www.aurorapatents.com/blog/continuation-practice
    ⦿ Quality Patents Part 4: https://www.aurorapatents.com/blog/itc-proofing-patents
    ⦿ After Final Practice: https://www.aurorapatents.com/blog/new-podcast-after-final-practice

    ** Follow Aurora Patents **

    ⦿ Home: https://www.aurorapatents.com/
    ⦿ Twitter: https://twitter.com/AuroraPatents
    ⦿ LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/aurora-cg/
    ⦿ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/aurorapatents/
    ⦿ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/aurorapatents/
    ⦿ TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@aurorapatents
    ⦿ YouTube: https://www.yo

    Show More Show Less
    1 hr and 9 mins

What listeners say about ​​Patently Strategic - Patent Strategy for Startups

Average customer ratings

Reviews - Please select the tabs below to change the source of reviews.