2019 CLE Calendar
January 24 Noon (Belo)
Quantum Computing and Block Chain Technologies -
Patent Law Perspectives
Michael K. Henry, Ph.D., Henry Patent Law Firm PLLC
Ozz Siddiq, Lennox International
Topic: IP attorneys need to understand emerging technologies and how they might impact drafting, prosecution and enforcement of IP rights in their practice areas. Two of today’s biggest growth technologies are quantum computing and block chain systems. We will discuss the potential interplay between quantum computing and block chain technologies that we might expect to see in the future, as both industries mature.
On the topic of quantum computing, we will provide a current overview of the quantum computing industry (who’s doing what, and why), a summary of state-of-the-art quantum computing resources, and an outlook on future developments in the field. We will also address some popular myths about quantum computing.
Finally, pertinent issues in patent law will be discussed: Should patent attorneys account for the dawn of commercial-grade quantum computers when they draft patent applications for other types of technologies? Might quantum computing inventions receive the same patent-eligibility analysis under 101 as “classical” computing inventions? Can we detect infringement of a quantum computing claim, or is a quantum processor just an unknowable “black box” (as alleged in a recent, unfortunate legal publication)?
On the topic of block chain, we will provide a brief overview of block chain technology and how it is implemented currently. We will discuss how certain industries (e.g., insurance, shipping) are already seeing implementations of block chain to carry out transactions with an added level of transparency for all parties involved. We will then discuss how block chain will be used in the legal field in areas of “smart contracts,” transfer of title, and IP rights. F inally, we’ll discuss the potential hurdles with filing block chain patents and overcoming 101 rejections.
For presentation materials, click here.
February 21 (Belo) Noon
Licensing Do’s and Don’ts & War Stories
Advanced Topics in IP Licensing
Paul Herman of Sabic Americas, Inc.
Advanced topics in IP licensing, including patent, trade secret, copyright, trademark, and character licensing. We will explore a wide range of examples, from University research agreements to toys, movies, books, TV shows, and gaming, all of which have their own unique challenges and special issues. Provisions from recent licenses will be included.
March 6 North Dallas CLE
Table-moderated CLE Discussion on Strategies to Address Patent
Breakfast Provided (Free of Charge for DBA Members)
1.0 Hrs. Ethics Credit (applied)
Location: Blue Mesa Restaurant 14866 Montfort Dr Dallas, TX 75254
March 18 (Belo) Noon
USPTO Practice Update featuring Three Regional Directors from Dallas, Denver, and San Jose, and Atlantic Outreach Liaison USPTO
John Cabeca, Regional Director,
Silicon Valley Regional Office
Molly Kocialski, Rocky Mountain Regional Office
Liz Dougherty, Atlantic Outreach Liaison
Hope Shimabuku, Texas Regional Office
This moderated program will include a discussion of the latest guidance for practitioners appearing before the Office, updated statistics, and new agency initiatives. There will also be opportunity for Q&A from the audience.
March 22 (Belo) Noon-4pm
Trademark Boot Camp - Trademark Basics
March 27 (Belo) Noon
"Branding the Great Bambino"
Babe Ruth (baseball hero) v. Baby Ruth (candy) Dispute
(with the DBA Sports & Entertainment Section)
Speaker: Jane Leavy, Author & Reporter with Washington Post
Ms. Leavy will discuss an IP dispute Babe Ruth had over the Baby Ruth candy bar.
April 25 (Belo)
Artificial Intelligence and IP
Yoon Chae and Brian McCormack
What is AI? Recent developments in AI, and patent law issues impacted or likely to be impacted by AI including patent subject-matter eligibility of inventions on AI, patentability and inventorship of inventions created by AI, liability for infringement by AI, and AI-driven legal technology. Click here for presentation materials.
May 23 (Belo)
Playing the Odds – Using Data Analytics in Patent
Prosecution and Litigation
Adam Stephenson, IPTechLaw, Scottsdale, AZ
June 27 (Belo)
Online Infringement: Best Practices for Combatting
Counterfeits and Imposters
Speakers: Dyan House of Baker McKenzie; Heather Foster of Fossil; Leanne Stendell of Friday's; Joel Voyles of Investigation Services Co.
Topic: The panel will address best practices for protecting brands online – from stopping infringing uses to seizing counterfeit goods sold via websites and online marketplaces. The discussion will also include an overview of recent trends in issues and cases involving counterfeit goods and other online infringement. We will also hear from the panel on their own creative approaches to stopping infringers when a run-of-the-mill letter just wouldn’t do.
July 25 (Belo)
Supreme Court update
Paul Reilly and James Williams of Baker Botts
Recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions relating to intellectual property, including, Helsinn Healthcare S.A. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA Inc (patent – on sale bar); Fourth Estate Public Benefit Corp. v. Wall-Street.Com (copyright registration); Rimini Street Inc. v. Oracle USA Inc.; Mission Product Holdings Inc. v. Tempnology, LLC (copyright – fee awards); Iancu v. Brunetti (trademark – immoral/scandalous marks); Return Mail Inc. v. U.S. Postal Service (patent – review proceedings.
North Dallas CLE at Toyota Headquarters
(Noon) RSVP Required, Licensing CLE (Roundtable Discussions)
Aug. 22 (Belo) - (Noon)
Ethical Traps of Joint Representations in IP cases
Justin Cohen, Thompson Knight
We will cover the ethical issues involved in representing multiple parties in the same patent or trademark case, such as privilege, confidentiality, conflicts, disputes, and settlements. Topics will include: common joint representation situations, explaining joint representation to clients, structuring joint representation agreements, confidentiality and privilege issues, including the joint defense privilege, when are positions “adverse” for conflict purposes, how to resolve disputes between clients, the aggregate settlement rule.
Sept. 26 (Belo)
Where are we on IPRs? A Review of the Updated Trial Practice Guide, Claim Construction, and Federal Circuit Decisions
Andy Ehmke and Thomas Kelton, Haynes and Boone, LLP
We have seen changes in the IPR landscape over the last year. Examples include the effects of Phillips claim construction on litigation and IPR tactics, Federal Circuit cases regarding proving up prior art, and the Updated Trial Practice Guide and its guidance on parallel petitions. This presentation will address recent changes and provide practice tips, hypotheticals, and war stories.
Craft & Growler, Evening
James Gourley and Chelsie Spencer, Carstens & Cahoon
This CLE provides an overview of the intersection between cannabis, which remains a Schedule I controlled substance in the United States, and intellectual property. Our presenters will discuss patent prosecution and current patent litigation concerning cannabis, cannabis trademarks and trade secrets, and the intersection between federal and state intellectual property law.
Dec. 5 (Belo)
Copyright Trial Perspectives:
DynaStudy, Inc. v. Houston Independent School District
The presentation will cover aspects of trial for copyright and DMCA cases, including voir dire strategy, witness examinations, how to present statutory damages evidence to a jury, insights from trial from the perspectives of both parties, and closing argument strategies when statutory damages for copyright and DMCA are at issue.
Noon CLE meetings are typically held on the fourth Friday of every month (with some exceptions).
We also host periodic breakfast CLE roundtable discussions at a North Dallas location on important IP topics.
The Intellectual Property Section of the Dallas Bar Association presents the information on this web site as a service to our members, guests and other Internet users. Copyright ownership of the materials posted on this website remains in the individual authors. These materials are for your personal use only. While the information on this site is about legal issues, it is not legal advice. Moreover, due to the rapidly changing nature of the law and our reliance on information provided by outside sources, we make no warranty or guarantee concerning the accuracy or reliability of the content at this site or at other sites to which we link.
By Xato (Own work) [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons
Sheet music: "Beauiful Dreamer" by Stephen Foster
Next CLE: Sept. 30, 2021
(Virtual Zoom, Noon)
"Arthrex, Minerva, and the Future of Patent Validity”
Speaker: Professor Saurabh Vishnubhakat, Texas A&M School of Law
The Supreme Court’s October Term 2020 included two significant patent law decisions. In Arthrex v. Smith & Nephew, the Court held that the USPTO’s administrative patent judges were improperly appointed principal officers, and imposed a judicial remedy to fix the constitutional defect. In Minerva Surgical v. Hologic, the Court substantially narrowed—but did not abolish—the ability of patent owners to block past assignors from challenging patent validity. Professor Saurabh Vishnubhakat from Texas A&M University will summarize these decisions and discuss what they mean for patent rights going forward.