Vincent LoTempio

My mission as an IP Attorney is to help people recognize, protect and profit from their good ideas. As a Registered Patent Attorney based in Buffalo, New York, I focus on all types of Intellectual Property law. As an IP attorney, I file patent and trademark applications in the United States and abroad. I manage large corporate patent and trademark portfolios, and have established associations with hundreds of Intellectual Property law firms around the world. I have extensive experience in patent and trademark prosecution, patent and trademark infringement litigation, trademark registration and copyright registration. Call me TOLL FREE: 1-800-866-0039 to protect your ideal today. LoTempio Law Website File A Patent File A Trademark File A Copyright YouTube Twitter

2 Comments

  1. KC Delaware
    December 22, 2011 @ 4:00 pm

    I have followed this case and that blog too. Try as I might to poke holes in the blog, their links to the underlying ACTUAL COURT DOCUMENTS bear out the one-sidededness — Facebook presented smoke and mirrors. That’s what I most dislike about jury trials on 102(B). The overlapping concepts of “public disclosure” and “on sale bar” are just too confusing for a lay jury to grasp in the span of a few days of deliberation and such a wide range of patent laws. If I had no evidence, I’d hide in that jury confusion just like Facebook apparently did.
    I have a friend who was on a jury focus group for Facebook. He told me that Facebook focused on innuendo using deposition video snippets of the inventor. We all know such smoke and mirrors sometimes works. I stopped doing that years ago because it usually backfires on appeal.

  2. SB2
    December 22, 2011 @ 4:42 pm

    I was on a patent infringement jury and can attest to the utter frustration of sorting out the infringer’s “word chase” through the inventor’s documents for any words like “offer” and “sale” and “deal.” The largely blue-collar jurors (with little to no experience with the broad way business-people use terms like “deal”) got lost in the “selling” lingo. I found myself having to say repeatedly “Guys, when a businessperson says ‘deal’ it doesn’t necessarily mean they are offering something for sale.” I might as well have been speaking to the wall. They didn’t get it. To them, such language is tantamount to an offer for sale. In our case, the inventor would often use “deal” when describing prospective future business once his invention was perfected — more like an agreement to agree if things happen like we’d like and the invention is actually perfected. That isn’t on sale bar, and there was no proof the invention was present in our case either. The parties settled during jury deliberations, so it did not go to appeal.