Bejin Bieneman PLC is an intellectual property boutique serving clients nationally and internationally.  Our mission is to maximize client return on investment by understanding client business objectives to deliver long term returns.  We base our services on a foundation of timely and responsive communications in addition to high-level execution.

Headquartered in Detroit, Michigan, our office is adjacent to the United States Patent and Trademark Office’s Detroit office, and a stone’s throw from the beautiful Detroit Riverwalk.  Our location proximate to the Detroit Patent Office allows us to provide our clients with extra value in patent matters.

We are a full-service IP law firm.  Our attorneys are seasoned patent and trademark prosecutors and litigators.  We have a wealth of experience in all aspects of intellectual property law, including licensing and intellectual property due diligence.


Ex parte Schulhauser and Conditional Claim Limitations

Presenter: Chris Francis of Bejin Bieneman

April 20, 2017 12:00pm

In a 2016, the PTAB opined on the broadest reasonable interpretation of conditional claim limitations in Ex parte Schulhauser.  In October 2016, the PTAB designated the Ex parte Schulhauser decision as precedential.  Since then, over three dozen ex parte PTAB decisions cite the precedential Schulhauser opinion.  In our 30 minute webinar, Chris Francis will discuss the holding in the Schulhauser decision and the application of the Schulhauser opinion in subsequent PTAB decisions.

Please register here.

Intellectual Property Blog

The Federal Circuit has upheld the invalidity of a patent whose claims recite “[a] computer-implemented method for providing certified financial data indicating financial risk about an individual.”  Clarilogic, Inc. v. FormFree Holdings Corp., No. 2016-1781 (March 5, 2017) (opinion by Judge Reyna, joined by Judges Lourie and Chen) (non-precedential).  The court affirmed the lower court’s […]
Posted: March 24, 2017, 4:15 am
The Federal Circuit has upheld the patent-ineligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101 of all claims of U.S. Patent No. 8,614,710, directed to “a method for deriving a pixel color in a graphic image.” Coffelt v. NVIDIA Corp., No. 2017-1119 (Fed. Cir. March 15, 2017) (per curiam and non-precedential; panel was Chief Judge Prost and Judges […]
Posted: March 23, 2017, 4:05 am
Claims included in an original patent application are part of the written description, which is why the Federal Circuit reversed a summary judgment that claims of U.S. Patent No. 6,947,882 were invalid for lack of written description support under 35 U.S.C. § 112. Mentor Graphics Corp. v. EVE-USA, Inc., Nos. 2015-1470, 2015-1554, 2015-1556 (Fed. Cir. […]
Posted: March 21, 2017, 4:02 am
A patent claim that recited displaying one set of information “near” another set of information was not thereby rendered indefinite, the Federal Circuit has held in Mentor Graphics Corp. v. EVE-USA, Inc., Nos. 2015-1470, 2015-1554, 2015-1556 (Fed. Cir. March 16, 2017) (opinion by Judge Moore, joined by Judges Lourie and Chen) (precedential).  This case has […]
Posted: March 20, 2017, 4:16 am
There was no exceptional case under 35 U.S.C. § 285 where a plaintiff filed and prosecuted a complaint alleging infringement of a patent whose claims were held invalid for failure to claim patent-eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101.  Telinit Technologies, LLC v. Alteva, Inc., No. 2:14-CV-369 (E.D. Texas, March 3, 2017).  After a […]
Posted: March 16, 2017, 4:33 am

Back to Top