Is the Green Card Lottery the easiest and fastest way to get a permanent US visa?

The official US patent application form is available for free. The current version is 2.2.2 dated August 1, 2008.

The current version is 2.2.20 dated July 27, 2009.

The current form is version 2.1.15 that is dated July 27, 2009.

A Green Card or Permanent Resident Card acts as proof of a person's lawful permanent resident status in the United States. There are many ways of obtaining a green card. The USA Green Card Lottery, also known as the Diversity Immigrant Visa Program or the Diversity Visa (DV) Lottery Program, is officially organized by the U.S. Government and conducted by the Department of State every year. To get a Permanent Resident Card through Diversity Visa Lottery Program you need to register online. If your green card application is approved, you will be notified. Is the Green Card Lottery the easiest and fastest way to get a U.S. Permanent Resident Visa? If all the above mentioned criteria are fulfilled, then you are qualified for the Green Card Lottery Program. No one would like to miss the opportunity to participate in Green Card Lottery.

None of us are as smart as all of us. The application of Open Innovation

During the course of an internal and collaborative programme of research to combine the principles of Open Innovation with a range of other inventive problem solving strategies, the main problems encountered during open innovation initiatives have been identified as follows: 1) The initial problem posed to the open innovation community is the ‘wrong problem'. 2) Lack of objective means to determine whether a ‘new' solution is better than existing solutions. 4) Failure to adequately transfer the surrounding tacit knowledge from domain to domain. Having discussed the main Open Innovation problems, we go on to outline a number of solutions. The Wrong Problem Based on our research, the first of the four problems – companies defining the wrong problem – is both prevalent, and the problem most likely to damage the reputation of the OI cause. From anopen innovation perspective, knowing they are unable to make the transition, incumbents thus tend to pose open innovation questions that are about improving matters in the current business model. Here are a few exemplar case studies of the problem: * A company asking for solutions to improve temperature retention in soda cans by incorporating an internal insulating layer. Except that the problem owners have decided that they want to solve the problem at a level they understand. If the problem owner, however, has no authority to solve the problem at a different level, or – worse – has no domain knowledge to be able to judge whether a proposed solution at one of those levels is better, then the opportunity is lost. open innovation figure 1

The figure includes a description of the bread problem as an exemplar. The posed open innovation problem of bread with a crusty-crust and a soft middle is very much about trying to solve tangible level problems associated with the purchase and consumption of the bread. Figure 2: ;Outcome Mapping Template And Bread
As soon as an open innovation problem owner goes to the world with a problem like ‘find better ways to join component A and B together' it is theoretically possible to very quickly identify other ways of delivering the required function (Reference 2).

Figure 3.

Figure 3: Looking For Solutions In Domains That Are Known

Although unable to solve this out-of-domain-knowledge psychological inertia problem, one thing that can be done to help ease the transfer of solutions from one domain to another is not just arrange knowledge in functional terms, but also then to map solutions within each function in terms of how well a given solution performs certain key attributes. Figure 4: Attribute Mapping Of Different Join Methods

Even if incumbent designers and engineers can be convinced of the potential merits of a solution from another domain, the almost inevitable next problem is that the specific context of the originating domain is inherently different from the context of the domain looking for a new solution.

The coriander industry has traditionally solved the problem by using a rotating drum to mechanically fragment the shells. The coriander process engineers, however, understood rotating drums and were basically looking for a better mechanical system. Getting pistachios out of pistachio shells frequently uses the rapidly changing pressure solution to achieve its desired outcome. Given the importance of speed in any production process, this was obviously a problem for the coriander process engineers. According to TRIZ, someone somewhere will already have solved such problems (Reference 3). Figure 5: Mapping The Coriander Problem Onto The Contradiction Matrix
It is beyond the purpose and intention of this paper to discuss how those generic solutions were translated into actual solutions to the coriander problem (needless to say; they were).

Tacit Knowledge

To an extent, nearly all open innovation projects seek to resolve tacit knowledge problems by introducing a development and/or validation programme into the contractual relationship they form with a solution provider. Such validation programmes are designed to transfer the knowledge from technology owner to problem owner. The fourth reason that open innovation initiatives go wrong is that, by definition, tacit knowledge is knowledge that the domain experts are unable to formally communicate to third parties.

Open Innovation as a concept makes considerable sense.

Figure 6: (Systematic) Open Innovation Protocol

Open Innovation needs to open itself to the idea that someone, somewhere already solved the problems it currently faces.

Contradiction Matrix‘, Creax Press, 2003.

How to bring in your adopted kid to the US?

Corporation A and Corporation B are co-owners of a U.S. patent.

Later, Corporation Z approached B for a license to the patent. Eventually, B decided to not sell the patent rights to Corporation A, but to negotiate a license to Corporation Z.

Each co-owner may license to others, without another co-owner's consent. The Federal Circuit examined the quoted paragraph from the Corporation A-Corporation B agreement. Also, the paragraph's requirement that Corporation B provide Corporation A with reasonable assistance during the litigation did not prohibit Corporation B from granting Z a license. Adopting a child from another country is called overseas adoption.

(i) Hague Process

Hague Process

If the parents who are intending to adopt a child have filed Forms;I-800A;and I-800, then it indicates that the child is from a country that has implemented The Hague Adoption Convention (Hague). If the adopted child is in a Hague country, then the child will enter the US either with an IH-3 immigrant visa.

If the parents who are intending to adopt a child have filed Forms;I-600A;and/or I-600, then it indicates that the child is from a country that has not implemented The Hague Adoption Convention.; If the adoptive parents have finalized the adoption in a non-Hague country and if any of the parents (married) have already seen the child prior to or during the adoption then the child will enter the US either with an IR-3 immigrant visa. The prospective adoptive parents must accrue two full years of legal and physical custody of the adopted child. The adoption should have been finalized before the child's 16th birthday. If the child is the biological sibling of a child that the prospective adoptive parents ;have already adopted or will adopt, then the adoption has to be finalized before the child's 18th birthday if they are a).

Totally free power now - Power is accessible to us all, why spend for it?

Cellulite remedies are real.

The government patent site is free, so you can do a search yourself, using the word 'cellulite' in a patent title search.

One caution about herbal patents to keep in mind is that they are composition patents.

Medical Research on PubMed

The PubMed medical database lists pertinent research on cellulite via several different keywords. In the case of herbal preparations for treating cellulite, science does offer some good support.

Cellulite Remedies - Science Behind US Patents on Herb Compositions

Free energy... According to scientists, free energy is a fallacy.

The sun emits enough energy on the surface of the earth each minute to provide energy to the entire planet for a year. Luckily, with the internet available to almost 2 billion people around the world, we can share information about forms of free energy.

Wind power is another form of renewable energy to be reckoned with, but unfortunately the energy companies have moved in on this one and added it to their metered sources.

Let's all stick together and give these energy companies a run for their money...

Saving the US Economy – Productive Involvement of Government, Academia, and Home business

United States has the most expansive patent subject matter in the world. An inventor gives an invention to the public and gets exclusive rights over it for a limited period of time.

To be eligible for a patent, an invention should satisfy the requirements of Patentable subject matter (Sec. 101),

Usefulness - An invention would be eligible for a patent grant only if it is useful (35 USC Sec. 101). The utility of the invention should be current, substantial and credible.

Non-obviousness - An invention to be patentable should not be obvious or known at the time of invention. An invention is obvious, if a single prior art reference or a combination of prior art references as a whole, make the invention obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art to which the invention belongs. The invention should be obvious at the time of conception of the invention and not at the time of contention of obviousness.

Specification - An inventor must file a patent application containing a specification (35 USC Sec. 112). The claims define the metes and bounds of the invention claimed by the inventor. (35 USC Sec. 101). As per section 101, any new and useful invention or discovery, which is a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter is patentable. Selling the invention for testing deprived it of the novelty.

An invention can not be patented, if the inventor had abandoned the invention to the public. An invention is not patentable if another person before the applicant has invented it. The rapid development of the Asian economies provides numerous examples of methods to develop job growth, incubate new technologies and new products, scale-up to production and manufacture of the new product, and develop a strong economy. As Tom Blair, in his book Poorer Richard's America: What Would Ben Franklin Say?, "the government of China spends their money to build industry and sell products, and the USA spends money to make the world safe." Not long ago in California, and in particular the Silicon Valley, the most dynamic economy on the planet was in place, thanks, partly, to local, state, and federal government, where a tremendous incubation of new companies and new technologies was occurring. Those companies went on to produce their products in California, realizing great job growth and bolstering the economy. Clearly, the great Silicon Valley innovation machine hasn't been creating many jobs lately in the USA.

In years past, scaling-up to production and manufacture worked well in the Silicon Valley. Investors provided money to build the new business. American companies discovered they could have their manufacturing and even their engineering done cheaper overseas. Meanwhile, a very effective computer-manufacturing industry has emerged in Asia, employing about 1.5 million workers, including factory employees, engineers, and managers.

The deterioration of US job creation is endemic to much of US industry, not just in our computer industry. Alternative energy is another example, where an emerging industry is replete with much innovation. Photovoltaics are a U.S. invention. With some technologies originally developed in the USA, such as advanced batteries, both scaling-up to production and innovation are occurring overseas. New companies are emerging in the USA, including Tesla in Northern California and Fisker in Southern California.

The small presence of the USA in the production of high-tech batteries presents a problem for growing this, and related industry in the USA.

Adversion to risk may be another problem companies face. Foreign governments often mitigate the risk of companies through government funding. The investments required are much higher than in the invention phase.

However, in previous years, when Intel's business focused on making memory chips, Intel hesitated to add manufacturing capacity, not being sure about the market demand in years to come. Again, technical knowhow and innovation are being exported overseas, with long-term economic consequences, as well as the killing and sickening of people because of poor quality control overseas.

Again, the economic mantra of today seems to be "free market is best, and government is the problem."

Evidence of government working through a controlled free market to develop economies and advance innovation, jobs, and a strong industry presence is observed in several Asian countries during the past few decades. These countries seem to understand that job creation and building industry must be the No. 1 objective of state economic policy. Over time, the Golden Projects contributed to the rapid development of China's information infrastructure, job creation, and the country's economic growth.

Further, the birth of the biotech industry in California was largely a result from work at a number of great research universities, supported by government, including the University of California.

In the biotech industry this is reflected by many companies developing an "Indian" or "China" strategy to move production or studies overseas because their competitors are doing so already.

To better compete in the world economy, the US will need to view business in the long term as well as the short term. Outsourcing overseas and giving away our scale to production for short term profits needs a disincentive, thus rebuilding our industrial base. Government needs to support our great research institutions, provide liquidity in the financial markets for all businesses, including start-ups and small businesses, and should develop a system of financial incentives, such as to levy a tax on products produced offshore. Then use the dollars from this tax to provide liquid capital to those companies creating innovative products in the USA and/or scaling their production within our borders.

Reunification Day Celebrations Remind Us of Needed Foster Care Changes

A patent grants property rights to an inventor, and is issued by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

If you're wondering how to patent an idea, it's the same process as for an actual invention. A utility patent is usually the patent of choice because in most cases it offers the best protection.

In your search for information on how to patent an idea, you will learn that utility patents protect a wide range of items, including a product, apparatus, process, system, machinery, and more.

Should Children's Protective Services believe that your child is being mistreated, neglected, or abused, it is possible that the state will funnel them into the foster care system, ultimately tearing families apart. While in the custody of the state, foster children see their siblings or parents infrequently, and also receive substandard medical and mental health treatment.

While state officials are quick to remove children from their homes, parents in Michigan have insufficient options for reunifying their family. Furthermore, the time it takes for children to be returned to their parents is extensive–Michigan's return rate time is double the national average. Assisting parents as they attempt to navigate the legal process is essential to ensuring that children are reunited with their family. Contacting hard-working who give sound legal advice and legal representation will help to ensure that your children stay out of foster care and at home where they belong.

Federal Report on DUI Statistics Highlights Impaired Driving in US

The official US patent application form is available for free. At the current time, version number 2.1.16 dated July 27, 2009 is the right form to use. The current version is 2.2.2 dated August 1, 2008.

The SB16 is the provisional application for patent cover sheet and its current version is 1.0.1 that is dated August 1, 2008.

The current version is 2.2.20 dated July 27, 2009.

The current form is version 2.1.15 that is dated July 27, 2009.

Patent Application Form - Use the One From the US Government

As a , clients accused of drunk driving charges are represented on a daily basis.

Using DUI statistics presented by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Administration, the report estimate that DUI statistics for 2006-2009 fell to 13.2%, when compared with 2002-2005.

Bankruptcy law in US with concentrate on Maryland: A preliminary guide for novice

o tightening the definitions of continuation and divisional applications and restricting the kinds of claims that can be pursued in divisional applications;

o limiting the number of claims per application to 5 independent claims or more than 25 total claims (the "5/25" rule), unless an "examination support document" (ESD) is filed along with the application;

The new rules limit the number of continuation (or continuation-in-part) applications that applicants may file per application without justification to only two. Additional continuation or continuation-in-part (CIP) applications require justification. Beyond the above mentioned two continuations, applications pending prior to August 21, 2007 in which two continuation or continuation-in-part applications have already been filed are allowed to have one additional continuation application filed without justification. This additional continuation application may be filed before or after November 1, 2007.

Divisional applications may only be filed to non-elected groups of claims created when an Examiner finally restricts claims of an application. A properly filed divisional may also have two additional continuation applications filed without a justification; however, CIP applications claiming priority to a divisional application are not permitted.

The new rules also state that any continuing application that contains claims previously examined in any prior-filed application is not a proper divisional application. Under the new rules, only one RCE may be filed per application and its continuation applications without justification. Each divisional application and its accompanying continuation applications, if any, are also entitled to one RCE without justification.

The new rules thus effectively limit the number of claims for most applications. It is important to understand how the USPTO will calculate the number of independent and dependent claims per application.

o count all of the claims in copending applications containing patentably indistinct claims (including applications having a continuity relationship), but not in issued patents containing patentably indistinct claims, in determining whether each such application contains more than five independent claims or more than twenty-five total claims;

o count multiple dependent claims as the number of claims from which they depend.

For pending applications in which an RCE has been filed previously, only one RCE may be filed for each application after November 1, 2007 without a justification.

Consequences for Patent Application Filing Strategies

The new rules change the number of claims that can be filed in a given patent application. Now, only 5 independent claims and/or 25 total claims may be filed unless an examination support document is filed along with the application. This rule cannot be circumvented by filing multiple patent applications claiming the same invention because, as discussed above, applications filed with the same ownership and patentably indistinct claims will be considered to be the same application for the purposes of this 5/25 rule.

While only five independent and twenty-five total claims will be examined in an application, there is one way to file more than 5/25 claims initially in an application without filing an examination support document.

The new rules require that if two patent applications with the same ownership have patentably indistinct claims, the applications will be treated as one application under the 5/25 rule. Thus, both applications must have 5 independent and/or 25 total claims in this situation. Indeed, if the applications have the same effective filing date, overlapping disclosure, one identical inventor, and the same ownership, there is a rebuttable presumption that the claims of the two applications are indistinct.

LET US KILL ALL THE LAWYERS

The organization responsible for awarding patents within the United States is the United States Patent and Trademark Office or the USPTO. The USPTO has given 2.6 million patents within the country since 1975. Patent searches done by attorneys can be basic or comprehensive. Patent attorneys charge up to $500 for a basic patent search, and up to $1000 for a comprehensive search.

US Patent Searches

Wharton Law Dictionary describes reason as the very life of law. When the reason of law once ceases, the law itself generally ceases, because reason is the foundation of all our laws. This unreasonable and dogmatic criticism of my paper has again showed to me that this unreasonable law supported by equally unreasonable supporters. Threats, undue pressure and torture are as common in recording statements as the recording statements itself. A few threats, moderate physical torture are sufficient in these cases to extract confessions.

ASSISTANCE OS LAWYER WHILE RECORDING STATEMENT- THE STATEMENT IS NOT TRUE???

Neither a taxmen or legislature guarantee truth in the statements of witnesses. With the assistance of a lawyer, we can only guarantee that the statement is voluntary. After all these persons have been convicted on the basis of statements recorded in the presence of lawyers in the court of law.

To stop both types of abuses, lawyers presence is required during interrogation.

Rule of law is the basis of existence of our state.

CORRUPTION AND EXTRACTION OF STATEMENT:

Presence of lawyers during interrogation will also have a salutary effect on the tendency of corruption in the taxmen.

Threats. When we say “right to be represented by a lawyer”, it is a right of the person concerned to appoint a lawyer or otherwise, and not a right of a lawyer to practice. Thus when we say presence of a lawyer during interrogation, it is right of the persons to seek lawyers assistance if he so desires and feels the need.

If nobody has heard taxmen bludgeoning somebody to extract confessions, I am sure no assessee will seek lawyer’s presence during interrogation.

If this argument is accepted that all recording of statement is voluntary and as per law, there cannot be any objection to the lawyer’s presence during interrogation. In fact the lawyer’s presence will manifest the lawful working of the department and fair investigation of the taxmen.

LAWYERS PRESENCE DURING INVESTIGATION:

In not so barbaric societies, lawyers presence are allowed at some stages. In our society lawyers presence is guaranteed at least in criminal trials and in civil proceedings involving grave consequences.

The right to consult an attorney in private has deep roots in Anglo-American law. Confidentiality is key to the lawyer-client relationship; clients will hesitate to discuss delicate matters with their lawyers if they fear that their secrets will be disclosed. Following the case-law of the Swiss Federal Court prosecution authorities of the canton of Zurich can refuse to allow a lawyer to be present when a suspect is first questioned without giving reasons, but the law requires them to give reasons if they intend to exclude the lawyer from subsequent interviews.

Lawyers must be killed. They think they are sovereign, lawyers says sovereignty lies in the people. For, they cannot exploit people in the presence of lawyers.

But the people will not let the lawyers die.

Answers to Immigration and the Quickest Path to US Citizenship

United States has the most expansive patent subject matter in the world. An inventor gives an invention to the public and gets exclusive rights over it for a limited period of time.

To be eligible for a patent, an invention should satisfy the requirements of Patentable subject matter (Sec. 101),

Usefulness - An invention would be eligible for a patent grant only if it is useful (35 USC Sec. 101). The utility of the invention should be current, substantial and credible. An invention in order to be patentable should be new in the light of that exists at the time of conception of the invention.

Non-obviousness - An invention to be patentable should not be obvious or known at the time of invention. An invention is obvious, if a single prior art reference or a combination of prior art references as a whole, make the invention obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art to which the invention belongs. The invention should be obvious at the time of conception of the invention and not at the time of contention of obviousness.

Specification - An inventor must file a patent application containing a specification (35 USC Sec. 112). The claims define the metes and bounds of the invention claimed by the inventor.

The basic requirement for patentability is that the invention should fall within the scope of patentable subject matter as defined under Section 101. (35 USC Sec. 101). As per section 101, any new and useful invention or discovery, which is a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter is patentable. An invention generally falls under more than one category.

Selling the invention for testing deprived it of the novelty.

An invention can not be patented, if the inventor had abandoned the invention to the public. An invention is not patentable if another person before the applicant has invented it.

What To Do If You Have An Invention Idea

A lot of people have ideas that they think would make a great invention. Most people do not do anything with the invention idea that they have. Other people struggle with it to some extent, but do not see anything come to fruition. Here are some basic steps you can take to get your invention idea into the market, and then in the hands of end users.

The first thing you have to do is make sure that your idea is already patented someone drugi.Cijeli patent database is now online and searchable by keyword for anybody with an Internet connection. You should be familiar with the system, and then do the intensive search to see if your idea has already been claimed by someone else. Once you determine that you own ideas, free and clear, hire a patent agent to do more in-depth research, and then filed a patent for you.

When you own a patent on the invention of the idea, you're going to have to make a prototype and do a little market research. To get your invention into the hands of companies that can effectively IT market, you're going to have to give them some numbers that show how well your invention will do in the market. While you can certainly make up their own, many people hire an invention company to take care of it for them.

If you decide to hire an invention company, make sure they are legitimate. Many people have lost a lot of money hiring an invention company that simply fly-by-night operation. Some simple research in the Better Business Bureau and the FTC Web site, along with looking for the end-user feedback will establish the reputation of the company for you. Taking your invention idea from the start in the market can be a long, drawn out task. Make sure that some of the initial work yourself and hire people when you need it to make sure that your invention has hit the market.

Five Top US Manufacturers of Safes

There are many safe manufacturers in the world today, many of them to make high quality safes, others do not. Lets look at the top five U.S. manufacturers of safe and why they have earned a good reputation. I have them in alphabetical order to avoid any implication ranked among these companies.

or AMSEC American Security has been around since 1948, and are based in California. They boast the world's leading producer of burglar resistant safes. Indeed, safety is first and foremost in its design. They were the first manufacturer of round door vaults, which are harder to break in and were the industry standard for decades. They are also much more expensive, so he went on in AMSEC in the 1960s to develop a more cost effective square gate that offers maximum protection.

Modern day technology has led invasion AMSEC safes develop in the 1990s that uses a composite construction, combining a hard slab of steel and high strength concrete, which has offered great protection against attacks. With its focus on safety, AMSEC was the first American company to get the most burglaries Underwriters Laboratories rating TL15 and TL30, and they continue today to be one of the most innovative companies in the market.

Browning is an American company based out of Utah and its primary focus is to gun safes. Their goal is to heavy duty, protective safe to keep your guns and other valuables safe from theft or fire, but also looks good with a beautiful finish and fine craftsmanship. They also offer innovative interiors that make the most out of the space provided.

Cannon is manufacturing safes for more than 40 years. They believe that they should have the ultimate security at the best possible cijeni.Sigurno is a permanent investment, so Cannon offers a lifetime warranty that protects against fire, flood, attempted break-in and manufacturing defects for life. Their motto is: "Nothing Protects like a cannon ".

Liberty argues that the U.S. # 1 trusted manufacturers. They also offer a lifetime, transferable warranty for all their heads and all their safes are tested and evaluated by an independent UL lab. Liberty is a younger company than most, having been established in Utah in 1988, but quickly grew and in 1994 they were # 1 selling full-sized safe housing company in America.

In addition to the rapidly growing company, which has helped to acquire National Security Safe Company in 1997, they were also innovative in the market. In 1990 they introduced a special HiSecurity Composite Doors, which sandwiched layers family forum insulation and steel and hardened steel plate, which has increased security and fire protection. They also received a patent for a unique locking screw mechanism, and introduced an adjustable interior shelving and storage systems.

Sentry Safe was started during the Great Depression in the 1930s, as the Brush-Punnett Company. They had a simple formula, "Product quality and reasonable prices for its innovative engineering," which leads the company and allowed it successfully. They are still a family company, headed by third generation members of the Brush family, but changed its name to Sentry Group in 1987. Although based out of New York, they have a global presence, more fire-resistant safes and chests than any other company in the world.

If you're in the market for home, business or a gun safe, you can find top quality safes from any of these companies. Just do a little research to find what best suits your needs.

Sewing - Tools and History

The practice of sewing, as in working with thread and needle to attach many different kinds of material, has been dated to at least 20,000 years ago. Sewing is practically a universal occurrence, and the actual beginnings of it stretch back to the beginnings of history. It predates the weaving of cloth by various centuries, and was applied to stitch together hides, furs, and bark for clothing and other makes use of.

Early sewing needles had been created from bone, wood, or natural needles taken from plants as Native Americans did with the agave plant. The earliest verified sewing needles produced from iron date back to the third century B.C.E. and were identified in what is now Germany. Chinese archaeologists report locating a complete set of iron sewing needles and thimbles in a tomb dating from the Han Dynasty (202 BC-AD 220) in China. This is the earliest known example of a thimble in history. The thimble was created to assist early sewers to push needles by way of thick hides and furs, and was first produced from bone, wood, leather, often glass and porcelain. Later thimbles began to be created from metal, and just before the 18th century dimples in a thimble had to be punched into it by hand. The thimble also became an object of beauty with thimbles made from precious and semi-precious stones, and precious metals.

The initial thread was produced from plant fibers and animal sinew, which was applied to sew together hides and furs for clothing, blankets and shelter. Later it was discovered that fibers from plants and animals could be spun together to make thread. The ancient Egyptians created thread by spinning these fibers together, and devised strategies of dying the thread applying berries and plant matter. In China and Japan, silk fibers taken from the cocoon of the silk worm was spun to make really fine thread.

For most of the history of sewing, it was performed by hand. From the simplest stitches to ornate decorative work was performed with a needle, thread and a steady hand. It remained so till the initially patent for a machine that "emulated hand sewing" in 1790 in England. It is not known whether there ever was a machine built from the 1790 patent.

The initial functioning sewing machine was issued a patent to Barthelemy Thimonnier in France in 1830. It utilised a single thread and a hooked needle to make a chain stitch comparable to the 1 applied in hand embroidery. The inventor was almost killed when enraged French tailors rioted and burned down his garment factory simply because they feared the machine would trigger unemployment. In 1846 the American Elias Howe was issued a patent for his machine, but the mass production of the machines did not happen till the 1850's when Isaac Singer built the 1st truly profitable sewing machine. With needle, thread, thimble and machine, the art and craft of it has not only formed items for our use and comfort. Sewing has helped form civilization itself.

Sewing - Tools and History

The practice of sewing, as in making use of thread and needle to attach several kinds of material, has been dated to at least 20,000 years ago. Sewing is practically a universal occurrence, and the actual beginnings of it stretch back to the beginnings of history. It predates the weaving of cloth by several centuries, and was made use of to stitch together hides, furs, and bark for clothing and other uses.

Early sewing needles were made from bone, wood, or natural needles taken from plants as Native Americans did with the agave plant. The earliest verified sewing needles produced from iron date back to the third century B.C.E. and had been discovered in what is now Germany. Chinese archaeologists report discovering a total set of iron sewing needles and thimbles in a tomb dating from the Han Dynasty (202 BC-AD 220) in China. This is the earliest recognized example of a thimble in history. The thimble was created to help early sewers to push needles via thick hides and furs, and was first produced from bone, wood, leather, often glass and porcelain. Later thimbles began to be made from metal, and ahead of the 18th century dimples in a thimble had to be punched into it by hand. The thimble also became an object of beauty with thimbles made from precious and semi-precious stones, and precious metals.

The very first thread was created from plant fibers and animal sinew, which was utilized to sew together hides and furs for clothing, blankets and shelter. Later it was discovered that fibers from plants and animals could be spun together to make thread. The ancient Egyptians produced thread by spinning these fibers together, and devised approaches of dying the thread utilizing berries and plant matter. In China and Japan, silk fibers taken from the cocoon of the silk worm was spun to make rather fine thread.

For most of the history of sewing, it was performed by hand. From the simplest stitches to ornate decorative function was done with a needle, thread and a steady hand. It remained so till the initially patent for a machine that "emulated hand sewing" in 1790 in England. It is not known no matter if there ever was a machine built from the 1790 patent.

The 1st functioning sewing machine was issued a patent to Barthelemy Thimonnier in France in 1830. It utilized a single thread and a hooked needle to make a chain stitch similar to the one employed in hand embroidery. The inventor was practically killed when enraged French tailors rioted and burned down his garment factory because they feared the machine would cause unemployment. In 1846 the American Elias Howe was issued a patent for his machine, but the mass production of the machines did not happen until the 1850's when Isaac Singer built the 1st really productive sewing machine. With needle, thread, thimble and machine, the art and craft of it has not only formed items for our use and comfort. Sewing has helped form civilization itself.

Flying Cars in the Ether

Ether Machines are yet another type of non-traditional flyer. The 18th Century term ether can also be thought of as our term: Zero Point Power.

In simplicity, when you cool points down to near absolute zero temperatures, they develop into superconducting. In other words, once you put power into the devices, it stays there forever so lengthy as you keep the temperature in the especially cold superconducting range.

Properly, space is Continually in the superconducting range. In truth, you can hear the Massive Bang itself at three Degrees Kelvin. That is three degrees above Absolute Zero.

The vastness of the Universe contains a VAST superconducting power storage. This energy can be excited into creating matter and the types of power we can measure.

Karl Schappeller created a device to use the ether power. And we'll be finding to that.

According to Schappeller, Main Physics offers with this ether, zero point, energy. And all the physics that we know, such as aerodynamics, deals with Secondary Physics. He designed a sphere that makes use of ether in what he termed Reverse Thermodynamics. Rather of producing heat, it functions by generating cold.

We know how to measure heat. Thermometer, for instance. But how do you measure cold?

The wartime Germans figured out that gravity could be produced by a quadrupolar machine. It was a + and - thermodynamic machine, coupled with a + and - reverse thermodynamic machine. This quadrupolar setup developed gravity. Point it, and it's "anti" gravity... They called it a Vril.

What happened after the war was that as the Allies and the Russians overran the analysis and development areas, the Nazis, mainly SS overlords with war mentalities, destroyed the working models and papers.

What about the information and facts that does survive? What can WE do about it?

Nicely there are three (3) United States Patents that define a low-expense Flying Auto that YOU can own.

1 patent is issued and is a 'green' engine that we Should be using correct now. Today's vehicle engines, if they employed $3 per gallon gas, go down the road on $1 of that and throw away in heat $two. The patented engine will use $2 to go down the road and only throw away $1.00. Now this is the Real way to save power. It can energy an SUV on only 4 cylinders! It has compact, effective energy.

The other two patents describe a Flying Car that makes use of the hybrid engine considering that it is light and effective. The Flying Auto is low price and our best chance of getting a genuine George Jetson machine in our garages.

Why Can Patents Be Granted for Multiple Similar Inventions?

When a client reviews prior art, documents such as patents, patent applications, journal articles, items and other documents that disclose an invention, she is quite often struck by how many of the patents are for extremely comparable inventions. How can every single of these patents have been granted when they share so a lot of standard elements? There appears to be so considerably overlap.

Overlap is in reality an fundamental portion of the patent method. To recognize how the overlap functions in practice, 1 need to realize the most basic principle of patent law - a patent gives the holder the ideal to cease other people from practicing her invention, but it does not give the holder the ideal to practice her own invention.

For example, suppose you invented a unicycle with the longitudinal stabilizer. The stabilizer made it considerably much easier to ride a unicycle, and you effectively patented invention. I buy 1 of your unicycles, and mainly because I'm less coordinated than you, find that I also need a latitudinal stabilizer. With both the longitudinal and latitudinal stabilizers, even I can ride a unicycle, and I patent that invention.

Even though I hold a patent on a unicycle with the longitudinal and latitudinal stabilizer, I can not develop my invention without infringing your patent because my invention includes a unicycle with a longitudinal stabilizer. But, I could avoid you from making a unicycle with each longitudinal and latitudinal stabilizers. If the industry of klutzes who want to ride a unicycle is significant sufficient, you could get a license from me, or I could get a license from you, or we could cross license, so that unicycles with both stabilizers could be built.

This feature of patent law makes it possible for inventors to shield incremental improvements to existing items. It benefits society by encouraging innovation even when the innovator may perhaps be precluded from practicing his innovation without a license from the patent holder of the core invention.

It also indicates that numerous patents are granted for inventions that are highly comparable. Each and every of those similar patents are incremental improvements to or variations of the core invention. The inventors of the improvements and variations that are adopted should really be and are rewarded for their creativity. If one does not want to pay them, he is free to generate a product with no their innovations.

By allowing applications for similar inventions to be granted, innovation is encouraged, but at the cost of a great deal more intellectual property to consider and evaluation when creating a item. The plethora of similar patents in the United States is top viewed as strong evidence that innovation is alive and well.

How Much Does It Cost to Get a Patent in India?

Understanding the price structure whilst applying for a patent can aid in producing some imperative choices. Therefore, instead of having a generic idea about the overall price, it assists if you are aware of the breakdown of the price structure and the time of incurring such expenses.

The substantial costs involved in processing a patent application contains, the fee that has to be paid to the patent office (statutory fee) and the fee paid to the patent service provider (qualified fee). The expert fee varies based on the service provider you might possibly pick. Therefore, in this article I will deal only with the statutory fee.

The statutory fee depends on who the applicant of the patent is. The Indian Patent Workplace (IPO) has categorized the applicants into two categories:

1. Natural individual

two. Other than natural person

Any individual applying for a patent is regarded as a natural person. On the other hand, all other entities that do not fall under the initially category naturally fall under the second category. For example, legal entities, such as, companies would fall under the second category. It shall be noted that, a patent application can have more than one applicant, and even if one of the applicants do not fall under the initially category, then the patent application is regarded to be filed by the second category applicants.

The patent office collects 4 times the fee from the second category applicants as compared to 1st category applicants.

In this article, I will list down the fee applicable to the 1st category applicants. You might multiply this fee with 4 to establish the fee applicable to the second category applicants.

Serial number 1

An application for grant of patent has to be submitted. A fee of Indian rupee (INR) 1000 has to be paid even though submitting the patent application in the Indian Patent Workplace (IPO). This is a mandatory fee. The exchange rate for 1 US dollars was Indian rupee 45 at the time of writing this write-up.

Serial quantity 2

An early publication request has to be submitted if 1 wishes to have their patent application published earlier than the patent workplace norm of publishing patent applications 18 months from the priority date (date on which you initially file a patent application for your invention). This request carries a fee of Indian rupee 2500. The positive aspects of early publication consist of expedition of the patent application examination process.

This is an optional step.

Serial number three

A request for examination of patent application has to be submitted. A fee of INR 2500 has to be paid, requesting the IPO to examine your patent application. This fee can be paid within 48 months from the priority date. Then again, note that the patent office considers your application for examination only right after receiving this fee. Hence, if you want to expedite the patent process, it is advisable to pay this fee at the earliest. This is a mandatory fee.

Serial quantity 4

The IPO accepts patent specifications, which has up to 30 sheets with no charging any additional fee. Nevertheless, if the specification crosses 30 sheets, a fee of INR 100/sheet for each and every added sheet has to be paid to the IPO. This is a mandatory fee.

Serial number 5

Further, the IPO accepts patent specifications, which has up to ten claims (no limitation on independent claims) without charging any additional fee. Still, if the specification has a lot more than 10 claims, then a fee of INR 200/Claim for each and every extra claim has to be paid to the IPO. This is a mandatory fee.

I hope you obtain this write-up beneficial in filing patent applications in the Indian Patent Workplace.

Patent Docketing Software - If It's Broken, Fix It!

Countless users of last generation patent docketing software program really feel that there is no reason to upgrade. Almost everything is working fine. Why rock the boat? If the patent department has established metrics to evaluate the efficiency of the patent docketing technique, and the technique is consistently meeting or exceeding the benchmark, then pat your self on the back, considering that you rank higher among your peers. If that is not the case, then this is a fantastic time for a adjust.

This post will assist patent departments build meaningful metrics to measure the efficiency of their patent docketing program and revisit them whenever needed. Each and every patent department is distinctive and the metrics that function for 1 department may perhaps not work for one other. The objective is to assist IP departments create and measure their own metrics to determine no matter whether their patent docketing software program is meeting the objectives. Developing and measuring these metrics can present a basis for setting goals and establishes whether or not there is improvement or progress toward those goals more than time.

The key metrics can be categorized into 1 of these five locations:

1. Client Satisfaction

2. Information Management

three. Outside Counsel Management

4. Team Effectiveness

5. Visibility

Client Satisfaction

For the IP department, the clients are inventors, patent committee, important topic matter professionals and other stakeholders in technology and R&D groups. The metrics for client satisfaction include, but not limited to:

1. How effortless is it for your inventors to submit new invention disclosures?

2. How easy is it for your inventors to track what is happening on their submitted disclosures or patent applications and patents?

three. Do they have visibility into their awards?

four. How simple is it for your patent committee members to give their recommendations on invention disclosures?

five. How simple and easy it is for the topic matter specialists to interact with inventors for significantly more productive assessment and analysis?

6. How painless is it for senior management in technology and R&D to view the overall patent portfolio and pipeline?

Information Management

With out simple and easy access to managed information, each circumstance is addressed based on what the individual or group brings to the situation with them. With seamless access to managed expertise, every circumstance is addressed with the sum total of every little thing any person in the patent department has ever learned about a situation of a similar nature.

The metrics for expertise management incorporate, but not restricted to:

1. Do you have established metrics and rationale for evaluating invention disclosures for patent filings? If you do, can it be applied across all choices produced in the last 3-4 years?

two. How hassle-free is it for everyone to look at the foreign filing record and trace why the decision for this filing was taken?

three. How uncomplicated is it for someone to assessment annuity choices and know who produced the choice to preserve a certain patent and why?

four. How significantly time would it take for you to get a uncomplicated report, for example your whole patent portfolio grouped by jurisdiction and PTO status?

five. How considerably time would it take for you to project your overall spend for the next 3 months?

Outside Counsel Management

A quantity of patent departments use outside counsels for drafting, filing and prosecuting patent applications. The services provided by firm can account for 70% of the overall patent department spending budget. It is crucial to know if your existing patent docketing technique can supply you metrics to measure their performance.

1. How very easy is it for you to locate out what each and every firm is handling and the most up-to-date status on filings for each and every firm?

2. How considerably time would it take for you to get a report of overall invest per firm?

3. How rapid can you get the report of the turnaround time per firm?

four. Each and every time the OC requirements to collaborate with inventors (for example in patent application drafting), do they have to go through your team? How much time do you devote coordinating these activities?

five. How a lot do you know about extensions filed by law firms on office action responses?

Team Effectiveness

Patent docketing software is expected to help your team get more useful. Here are some metrics to help you determine if it is meeting the expectations-

1. How a lot time is your team spending on emails for sending facts to inventors, patent committee members, outside counsels?

2. How considerably time are they spending on duplicate entry of the very same information in many systems?

three. How a lot paper are they printing?

four. How straightforward is it for them to delegate perform to their colleagues?

five. How much time are they spending on calculating patent award payments?

Visibility

If you have been utilizing the patent docketing computer software to track invention disclosures, patents, trademarks, licenses and invoices, you will need to be in a position to get answers to the following concerns-

1. How much time would it take for you to view all invention disclosures, patents, trademarks and licenses by goods, by technology places and by small business units?

2. How rapid can your team get to all of their assigned tasks?

three. What visibility do you have into the workload of your team members and their typical response time?

4. How soon can you view the established budgetary goals for the fiscal year and the devote and accruals so far?

five. How effortless it for you to go to any record and get out the actual time status?

Lecorpio is created to present answers to all of these concerns. It automates all manual workflows, get rid of redundancies, and offer accurate reporting to help corporate IP departments improved service their customers and greater manage their service providers. If it is not broken, that's a great thing - but not a good cause for staying on an old technology.

Patent Protection for a Product Ideas or Inventions

3 Types of Invention Patents

A patent is a patent is a patent. False! There are several several subcategories of patents. This article demonstrates the 3 most important kinds of invention patents:

1. Utility Patents (cover new and valuable inventions such as mechanical devices, electronics, medical devices, biotechnology, gadgets, and processes for creating things).

two. Design Patents (cover new and ornamental styles of products (articles of manufacture) such as containers, furniture, toys, or housewares).

3. Plant Patents (cover new and distinct plant varieties such as flowering plants, vegetables and fruit trees).

In the United States, if the inventor makes an offer you to sell, makes a sale, or publicly discloses the invention, the inventor has one year from the earliest of those events to file a US patent application. Otherwise, an inventor will shed their US patent rights.

If an inventor makes an give to sell, makes a sale, or publicly discloses the invention ahead of filing a patent application he/she will likely lose their rights to file in foreign countries. WARNING: Do not assume you know exactly what category your patent falls below. Often there can be a rather fine line in between specific sorts of patents.

TIP: Attempt not to spend much time figuring out specifically what type of patent you should really file for. This is one of the responsibilities of your patent attorney. Don't be the patient who self-subscribes his/her illness on the online, and then walks into the doctors office preaching to the physician what they have! Exact same holds accurate for patents and intellectual property.

What to Do With Art That Is Material to the Patentability of Your Pending US Patent Application

Below U.S. Patent law, inventors and other people substantively involved with the preparation and/or prosecution of the application, such as assignees and patent attorneys, have a duty to disclose to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), information and facts which is material to patentability of the claimed invention. Failure to disclose known material references might result in the invalidity of the granted patent. The duty of disclosure can be fulfilled by preparing and submitting an Facts Disclosure Statement (IDS) to the USPTO.

An IDS can be submitted to the USPTO at any time during the prosecution of the application. Nevertheless, if an IDS is submitted immediately after receipt of the 1st office action, a fee will be assessed. Additionally, if an IDS needs to be submitted following a Notice of Allowance is received, the applicant will want to withdraw the application from allowance to have the IDS and cited references considered by the USPTO. This can be accomplished by filing a Request for Continued Examination (RCE).

Upon filing the application, if an applicant is conscious of any prior art, he is nicely advised to notify his lawyer (if applicable) of the prior art so an IDS can be included with the initial filing of the application. If an applicant or assignee is unsure of whether a reference ought to be cited in an IDS, a patent attorney must be consulted to identify the proper course of action.

Submission of an IDS upon filing an application might allow the applicant to prevent charges for late submission of an IDS, and also permits the USPTO to conduct an examination of the application in view of the already known prior art. Timely disclosure of prior art via submission of an IDS may perhaps also stay away from the withdrawal of the application from allowance.

Additional IDS submissions could be required for the duration of the prosecution of the application to make the USPTO aware of prior art that is cited in corresponding foreign applications.

Copies of U.S. Patents and U.S. Published Patent Applications do not want to be supplied to the USPTO. However, copies of non-patent documents and foreign references should be submitted. Translations of foreign language references ought to also be obtained and submitted to the USPTO, but note that a full translation of the reference is not necessary to fulfill the disclosure obligations.

Fulfilling the duty of disclosure to the USPTO can be a straightforward method if open lines of communication in between assignee, inventors, and their patent attorneys are maintained. Communication of identified art to the patent lawyer enables the lawyer to draft a stronger patent and also allows the timely disclosure of the known prior art to the USPTO. As noted above, timely disclosure may well stay clear of fees and, most importantly, the withdrawal of the application from allowance. If you have any concerns concerning this U.S. Patent Law requirement, please contact any of the patent attorneys at the Michaud-Kinney Group.

Golfer Reveals 2 Quick Patent Tips for Inventors

If you can't sell your idea, then there's no reason in finding it protected with a patent, correct?

Consequently, ahead of you spend a lot of time, money and effort going via the patent approach...you should consider how marketable your item is. How willing individuals are to obtain your thought from you.

The fine news is there is a straight forward two-step formula for maximizing the marketability (and so profitability) of your idea.

This formula saves time...and...lessens your initial investment.

Here's a quick story that goes a lengthy way to illustrate this very simple formula for uncovering patentable and profitable niches in the industry.

Patent Lessons from a Golfer

I just finished reading a short write-up on South Carolina golfer and inventor Michael Owens. Owens has a patent pending on a device that securely holds personal golf GPS devices and laser range-finders in place on golf carts.

The device that holds the GPS on golf carts only took him various months to make, test and refine. With an outstanding order of 1,200 units at $29.95 each, Owens will just about cover his initial $45,000 investment.

Less than a year and already his idea is paying off. In terms of bringing an thought to market, that is just about lightening speed!

The Easier Path to Patents

The inventor trick Owens utilised to speedily generate a profitable invention is simply obtaining a far better way to use an already wildly profitable item.

Here's how he did it...

Initial, Owens found a product that persons are already making use of.

If you are a golfer, you already know GPS units and laser range-finders are all the rage on the links. By linking his product to some thing that folks use and are familiar with, Owens greatly increased his probabilities of patenting a marketable product.

Second, get a way to make that item a lot easier to use.

In this case, Owen saw his pals fumbling with the GPS units in their pockets, in cart cup-holders, seats or open spaces in the dashboard region. By making a sturdy magnet-based GPS holder - that also did not will need to be removed consistently - Owens took a superb product and created it greater.

And if his patent application goes by way of, he will have the right to stop anybody else from producing, utilizing, or selling his idea. A legal monopoly that he can charge a royalty percentage or outright sell to a bigger corporation.

Maintain these two points in mind subsequent time you are operating on your subsequent major notion.

Biofuel Feedstocks - Patents Show That Abundant Switch Grass is a Focus As a Biofuel Source

As fuels derived from renewable resources take on a greater role on the global energy stage, it is vital that researchers continue to design novel approaches to produce biofuels to meet this demand. Of those renewable resources, switch grass has a large number of benefits as an ethanol source. In reality, a look at intellectual property disclosures citing novelties applying switch grass for ethanol production shows that indeed researchers are examining this abundant source.

In January, Chemical & Engineering News reported that researchers from the University of Nebraska found that a net power surplus resulted when switch grass was employed as a feedstock for ethanol production. Their five-year study discovered that 540 percent extra renewable power was generated as compared to the power required to grow and harvest the switch grass feedstock. While a net energy surplus is 1 criterion that need to be met to commercialize a feedstock for bioethanol production, other elements such as increasing the extractability of cellulose from the lignin matrix and the capability to ferment the sugars to ethanol have to be enhanced for this conversion method to succeed in market.

3 Businesses Dominate Patent Activity

An examination of U.S. and International patents identified 39 patents filed in the past 5 years dealing with ethanol generation from switch grass precursors. Whilst switch grass is noted as a feedstock employed in these inventions, other feedstock supplies are claimed as well, such as lignocellulosic feedstock sources such as wood, and waste agricultural fibers such as wheat straw and oat hulls. At present, researchers are particularly interested in utilizing readily out there and renewable biomass starting supplies to generate ethanol. Of these, Iogen, EI du Pont de Nemours (DuPont) and Novozymes have the most patents disclosing novelties on this technologies.

Iogen has nine patents, only 1 of which was filed in the United States. Most of Iogen's disclosures had been filed as European or Globe patent applications, an indication of where the enterprise thinks the market place will create. Iogen patents disclose inventions for alternative methodologies to pretreat feedstock prior to ethanol formation as described in Globe Patent Application 2005099854/WO-A1. Immediately after treating a feedstock such as switch grass with hot concentrated sulfuric acid steam to lower the material's particle size, a metal sulfate impurity can form and come to be entrapped in the chemically treated feedstock. This can have an effect on the transformation in fuel ethanol. 1 of Iogen's patent describes a pre-therapy extraction strategy to recover these inorganic salts, which can then be made use of for fertilizers.

Pretreatment Is a Prevalent Focus

An additional Iogen invention claims novel techniques to pretreat feedstock sources before ethanol formation (European Patent 01364072/EP-B1). This patent is based on lowering the amount of acid necessary to pretreat feedstocks, mainly because acid compounds can degrade xylose, an crucial component in ethanol production. To build lignocellulosic feedstocks of appropriate particle size for ethanol production, the patented methodology subjects the precursor to milling techniques that mechanically treat the biomass material.

One of DuPont's significantly more recent disclosures (the corporation has three Globe patent applications published between 2006 and 2007) also address treating biomass resources for ethanol formation. Published in 2006, Globe Patent Application 2006110900/WO-A2 describes a strategy of pre-treating biomass with ammonia compounds and digesting it with a saccharification enzyme to create fermentable sugars. The fermentable sugar is then biocatalyzed by adding biocatalysts that include bacteria, filamentous fungi, and yeast to generate ethanol. The patent describes making use of switch grass, but the bio-source could also be wastepaper, corn cobs, corn husks, corn stover, wood chips, or animal manure.

Also assigned to DuPont is World Patent Application 2007149450/WO-A2 published in December 2007. The patent notes that bacterial growth is a concern of ethanol fermenters because microbe formation throughout the fermentation method can convert sugars to non-ethanol merchandise which includes organic acids. This patent describes using chlorine dioxide to prevent microbe formation in the course of cellulosic feedstock fermentation. It also states that switch grass or other biomass resources can be made use of in this approach, such as potatoes or whey.

Novozymes is also a player, having filed two Globe patent applications in 2006 involving ethanol formation from switch grass, focusing on ways to pretreat lignocellulosic material just before fermentation. Cellulase and xylose isomerase can be combined in pretreating biomass materials to bring an boost in offered five-carbon sugars. These sugars then can be fermented into ethanol using enzymes such as saccharomyces cerevisciae. The patent states that switch grass as well as office paper, or pine wood can be made use of as the feedstock resource for this process.

Maintain an Eye out for Non-U.S. Patents

Researchers are at the moment disclosing via patent applications approaches to pretreat feedstock supplies which includes switch grass to improve the availability of cellulosic extractables. Most inventions were not filed in the U.S., so it is critical for providers looking for to monitor their competitors to assessment international disclosures. Companies are most interested in growing the quantity of extractable 5-carbon sugars as these have been shown to be most helpful in fermentation to ethanol. Further R&D efforts on making use of switch grass for ethanol production is expected to continue as commercial interest grows in the generation of biofuels making use of sources that have minimal impact on food production.