Comment on Provisional Patent Rights

Inventors in America long lived with the risk that others could copy and profit off an invention during the interim period when their patent application was pending at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). Even after inventors received their patent, they were unable to get compensation for any infringing uses that occurred prior to the patent issue date. With an ever-expanding backlog at the USPTO and the corresponding increase in the time it takes for an application to be examined, this unprotected period potentially cost inventors significant losses. Additionally, contrary to the purpose of patent laws “[t]o promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts,” inventors were incentivized to keep an invention secret from the public until their patent issued. In the American Inventors Protection Act of 1999 (AIPA), Congress gave patent applicants provisional rights in their published patent applications under 35 U.S.C. § 154(d). Prior to the passage of the AIPA in 1999, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, affirming its earlier decisions, had held that a patentee “may of course obtain damages only for acts of infringement after the issuance of the . . . patent.” However, the AIPA provided damages for infringement in the period before a patent applicant is granted a patent. Provisional rights, also known as pre-issuance royalties, provide a patentee with the prospect of obtaining a reasonable royalty from a third party that infringes a published application claim. This right is provided only if the third party has actual notice of the application and a patent issues from the application with a substantially identical claim. The Federal Circuit has not had the opportunity to interpret the “substantially identical” and “actual notice” requirements under § 154(d), but several district courts have done so. At first glance, the district court rulings appear to be conflicting. However, this Comment explains how the rulings are actually consistent, with each one adding a slightly different layer to the interpretation of § 154(d). Currently, the various rulings addressing the actual notice requirement have not only ruled out constructive notice but also indicate that direct notification action by the patentee is not a necessary condition. It is sufficient if the alleged infringer knew about the patent application through other channels. Other rulings indicate that when patentees do take direct actions to notify, they cannot conceal the notification among other documents, although they do not have to point out the infringement of specific claims. The cases addressing the substantially identical requirement emphasize that each claim amendment should be evaluated carefully to see if it changes the scope of the claim and that not all claim amendments preclude a finding that claims are substantially identical, even those that are in response to USPTO rejections. These cases suggest that narrowing amendments can preclude a finding that claims are substantially identical, and such an interpretation, when considered in combination with an earlier Federal Circuit decision that arguably expands the definition of narrowing amendments, could severely limit the application of § 154(d). This Comment first explores the different rulings, reconciles them, and suggests that the Federal Circuit should consolidate the rulings from the district courts into one binding decision that will provide greater certainty to litigants. This Comment also explores the potential implications of the suggested decision. Although the few district courts that have addressed these issues so far have produced reasonable results, their rulings are not binding. This Comment recommends that the Federal Circuit, when given the chance to review a case where § 154(d) provisional rights are disputed, provide a decision consolidating the reasonable interpretations applied by the various district court rulings up to this point. Otherwise, there is a risk that other district courts may produce undesirable interpretations. Forum shopping is very common in patent cases and infringers might find courts that take the interpretation in a direction that weakens the protection promised to inventors. Such uncertainty about the application of § 154(d) could conflict with Congress’s intent to provide protection for inventors and could increase overall litigation costs

Case Study on How High School Teachers Incorporate Technology in the Classroom to Meet 21st Century Student Learning Needs

Students are not adequately prepared to contribute to the workforce or engage in global citizenship in the 21st century. Research indicates proper education of students cannot be accomplished without teachers\u27 acceptance of technology in the classroom, engagement in effective professional development, and ability to transform their curricula. Although there is an abundance of research supporting the use of technology in the classroom, little research has examined how to incorporate the technology into student-centered learning. The research questions in this study examined teachers\u27 use and acceptance of technology in the classroom and how teachers incorporate technology to meet the 21st century learning skills requirements. This qualitative case study used Bandura\u27s social cognitive theory and the Partnership for 21st Century Learning Framework. The purposeful sample included 6 participants teaching in Grades 9-12. Data were gathered using a selection survey, interviews, and course documents. The data analysis included the organization of participant responses and development of 6 primary themes. The results indicated that a high level of technology self-efficacy drove these teachers\u27 integration of technology into student-centered activities that built 21st century learning skills. The results also showed a lack of effective professional development provided to teachers that focused on incorporating technology into the curriculum. These findings are significant for educators to understand how to meet the learning needs of their students. Implications for positive change include providing educators with knowledge and understanding of the importance to design professional development opportunities for teachers that not only teach how to use the technologies available to them but to also teach how to effectively incorporate that technology into the learning process

Comment on Provisional Patent Rights

Inventors in America long lived with the risk that others could copy and profit off an invention during the interim period when their patent application was pending at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). Even after inventors received their patent, they were unable to get compensation for any infringing uses that occurred prior to the patent issue date. With an ever-expanding backlog at the USPTO and the corresponding increase in the time it takes for an application to be examined, this unprotected period potentially cost inventors significant losses. Additionally, contrary to the purpose of patent laws “[t]o promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts,” inventors were incentivized to keep an invention secret from the public until their patent issued. In the American Inventors Protection Act of 1999 (AIPA), Congress gave patent applicants provisional rights in their published patent applications under 35 U.S.C. § 154(d). Prior to the passage of the AIPA in 1999, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, affirming its earlier decisions, had held that a patentee “may of course obtain damages only for acts of infringement after the issuance of the . . . patent.” However, the AIPA provided damages for infringement in the period before a patent applicant is granted a patent. Provisional rights, also known as pre-issuance royalties, provide a patentee with the prospect of obtaining a reasonable royalty from a third party that infringes a published application claim. This right is provided only if the third party has actual notice of the application and a patent issues from the application with a substantially identical claim. The Federal Circuit has not had the opportunity to interpret the “substantially identical” and “actual notice” requirements under § 154(d), but several district courts have done so. At first glance, the district court rulings appear to be conflicting. However, this Comment explains how the rulings are actually consistent, with each one adding a slightly different layer to the interpretation of § 154(d). Currently, the various rulings addressing the actual notice requirement have not only ruled out constructive notice but also indicate that direct notification action by the patentee is not a necessary condition. It is sufficient if the alleged infringer knew about the patent application through other channels. Other rulings indicate that when patentees do take direct actions to notify, they cannot conceal the notification among other documents, although they do not have to point out the infringement of specific claims. The cases addressing the substantially identical requirement emphasize that each claim amendment should be evaluated carefully to see if it changes the scope of the claim and that not all claim amendments preclude a finding that claims are substantially identical, even those that are in response to USPTO rejections. These cases suggest that narrowing amendments can preclude a finding that claims are substantially identical, and such an interpretation, when considered in combination with an earlier Federal Circuit decision that arguably expands the definition of narrowing amendments, could severely limit the application of § 154(d). This Comment first explores the different rulings, reconciles them, and suggests that the Federal Circuit should consolidate the rulings from the district courts into one binding decision that will provide greater certainty to litigants. This Comment also explores the potential implications of the suggested decision. Although the few district courts that have addressed these issues so far have produced reasonable results, their rulings are not binding. This Comment recommends that the Federal Circuit, when given the chance to review a case where § 154(d) provisional rights are disputed, provide a decision consolidating the reasonable interpretations applied by the various district court rulings up to this point. Otherwise, there is a risk that other district courts may produce undesirable interpretations. Forum shopping is very common in patent cases and infringers might find courts that take the interpretation in a direction that weakens the protection promised to inventors. Such uncertainty about the application of § 154(d) could conflict with Congress’s intent to provide protection for inventors and could increase overall litigation costs

Structure-Property Relationships of Imidazolium-Containing Polymer Systems: Homopolymers, Block Copolymers, and Block Copolymer/Ionic Liquid Mixtures

Advanced solid-state polymer electrolytes for electrochemical and energy storage applications are needed to replace conventional liquid electrolytes that are unstable, flammable, and volatile. In particular, a fundamental understanding of morphology-ionic conductivity relationships is necessary to improve the ionic conductivity of ion-containing polymer systems. To this end, we investigate the structure-property relationships of homopolymer and block copolymer systems containing imidazolium-based ionic liquids (ILs). We first explore the effects of anion type and pendant alkyl chain length on the morphologies and properties of polymerized ionic liquid (PIL) homopolymers with bound cations. In both acrylate-based and vinylimidazolium PIL homopolymers, nanoscale segregation of polar and non-polar moieties is detrimental for ionic conductivity. Increasing the length of alkyl pendant groups increases ion aggregation and decreases ion mobility, while increasing the size of mobile anions decreases ionic aggregate formation and the glass transition temperature, leading to increased ionic conductivity. The incorporation of hydroxyl-terminated alkyl pendant groups in vinylimidazolium homopolymers further decreases compositional heterogeneity of polar and non-polar moieties and increases ionic conductivity by one order of magnitude. We then examine the morphology-ionic conductivity relationships of IL-containing block copolymers and show that microdomain orientation, chain length, and confinement of polymer segments strongly impact ionic conductivity. Non-ionic diblock copolymer/IL mixtures, with the same block copolymer composition, display anisotropic lamellar morphologies, and morphology factors describing the extent of anisotropy are determined from X-ray scattering data. Ionic conductivities increase when lamellar microdomains are aligned parallel to the ion transport measurement direction and with increasing molecular weight. Self-consistent field theory calculations predict a more uniform IL distribution within microdomains when molecular weight is increased, suggesting that composition and dynamic gradients are detrimental to ionic conductivity. In hydrophilic PIL copolymers, ion transport is heavily dependent on water content and monomeric sequence. The conductivity of block copolymers is ten to fifteen times greater than that of random copolymers due to the microphase separation of ion-conducting and insulating blocks and local enhancement in ion concentration. At 90% relative humidity, several PIL block copolymers exhibit ionic conductivities that exceed their analogous homopolymers, suggesting that confinement of PIL chains and water in microdomains accelerates ion transport

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF SNAGS AND MAITLAND’S MOBILIZATION IN CHRONIC LOW BACK PAIN

Objectives: Comparative Study of Snags and Maitland’s Mobilization in Chronic Low Back Pain. Design: Randomized Control Trial. Methodology: A total of 60 patients were included as per pre define inclusion and exclusion criteria and randomly assigned into two groups each having 30 patients. Group A was given SNAG consisted of stretching strengthening and postural correction exercises while Group B was given Maitland’s mobilization consisted of stretching strengthening and postural correction exercises for 4 weeks, 3 sessions per week one session per day. The patient’s outcome measures were assessed by visual analog scale, ODI and Goniometry of Lumbar Range of Motion. Measurements were recorded before and after the end of the treatment period. Results: Results revealed that means and S.D of both group were significant (p=.000 ) statically but clinically the Group of patients treated with SNAGS along with stretching strengthening and postural correction exercises managed pain (pre=7.81±1.16, post=0.35±0.37), ODI(pre= 40±19.18 ,post= 9±4.39)and range of motion (flexion pre=30±6.05,post=51±10.15,extension pre=16±2.33,post=30±5.21 Rt side flexion pre=10±2.15,post=20±4.15 and lt. side flexion pre=10±2.75, post=20±4.53, Rt side rotation pre= 9±1.57,post=18±2.35) lt. side rotation pre=8±2.09,post=17±2.45 better than group of patient treated with Maitland’s mobilization along with stretching strengthening and postural correction exercises in terms of pain (pre=6.27±1.31, post=2.73±1.19), ODI (pre=42±20.52, post=24±11.7) and range of motion (flexion pre=24±5.85, post=36±10.66, extension pre=14±2.35, post=20±5.42, Rt side flexion pre=10±2.45 post=16±2.48, lt Side flexion pre=12±2.85, post=18±2.46, Rt side rotation pre=9±1.80 post=15.±2.81, lt Side rotation pre=8±1.75, post=16±3.27. Conclusion: The result of study suggests that both SNAG and Maitland’s improves the symptoms of chronic low back pain. Better improvement was shown by SNAG group than Maitland’s group. Based on these results SNAG and Exercise should be the treatment of choice for chronic Low back pain rather than Maitland’s with Exercise.  Article visualizations

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF MULLIGAN (SNAGS) AND MAITLAND MOBILIZATION IN NECK PAIN

Objectives: Comparative Study of Mulligan (SNAGs) and Maitland’s Mobilization in Neck Pain. Design: Randomized Control Trial. Methodology: A total of 50 patients were included as per pre define inclusion and exclusion criteria and randomly assigned into two groups each having 25 patients. Group A was given conventional therapy (Active, Isometrics exercises, moist hot packs) plus SNAG while Group B was given conventional therapy (Active, Isometrics exercises, moist hot packs) plus Maitland’s mobilization for 4 weeks, 3 sessions per week one session per day. The patient’s outcome measures were assessed by visual analog scale, NDI (Neck disability Index) and Goniometry for Cervical Range of Motion. Pre and post treatment values were recorded for comparison of results. Results: Results revealed that means and S.D of both group were clinically significant but statically the Group of patients treated with conventional therapy plus SNAGS managed pain (pre=4.25±1.6, post=2.35±0.3), NDI (pre= 15.81±2.5, post= 8.18±1.7) and range of motion (flexion pre=48.9±8.9, post=53.9±4.9, extension pre=55±4.1, post=63.9±3.1, Rt side flexion pre=38.5±2.1, post=43.1±2.0 and lt. side flexion pre=38.5±2.1, post=43.6±1.8, Rt side rotation pre= 61.7±6.3, post=65.7±5.5) lt. side rotation pre=60.5±3.01, post=67.6±3.5) is not better than group of patient treated with conventional therapy plus Maitland’s mobilization in terms of pain (pre=4.27±1.5, post=1.73±0.19), NDI (pre=17.1±3.31, post=8.10±1.10) and range of motion (flexion pre=48.5±4.7, post=56.7±6.5,extension pre=57.1±4.8, post=67.9±3.9, Rt side flexion pre=35.6±2.9 post=43.1±2.2, lt Side flexion pre=38.1±2.1, post=42.5±2.0, Rt side rotation pre=58.5±5.5 post=67.1.±5.4, lt Side rotation pre=59.6±5.6, post=67.7±4.3. Conclusion: The result of study suggests that both SNAG and Maitland’s improves the symptoms of Neck pain. Better improvement was shown by Maitland’s group than SNAGs group. Based on these results Maitland mobilization with conventional therapy should be the treatment of choice for Neck pain rather than SNAGs with conventional therapy.  Article visualizations

Acceptance of myths about sexual agression among Colombian university students

[ES] La presente investigación estudia la relación entre la aceptación de mitos sobre la agresión sexual en estudiantes de una universidad colombiana. Es un estudio de alcance correlacional con un diseño no experimental transversal en el que participaron 176 estudiantes, escogidos por medio de un muestreo no probabilístico por conveniencia. Se aplicó, de manera presencial y virtual, el instrumento Acceptance of Modern Myths about Sexual Aggression (AMMSA) en su adaptación al español. Se concluyó que existen diferencias significativas entre las variables sexo y facultad con los resultados en la prueba, siendo los hombres e ingenieros quienes mostraron una mayor normalización de situaciones sexualmente violentas.[EN] The following investigation studies the relationship between the acceptance of myths about sexual aggression among students at a Colombian university. The study has a correlation scope with a non-experimental cross-sectional group comparison design, in which 178 students were involved. The Acceptance of Modern Myths about Sexual Aggression scale (AMMSA), adapted into Spanish, was applied directly and virtually. As a result, this study has demonstrated the significant differences between the sex and faculty variables and the results of the test, in which the males and engineers showed a greater normalization of sexually violent situations

Las funciones ejecutivas como predictoras del rendimiento académico de estudiantes universitarios

In this paper, we study the relationship between Executive Functions (EF) and academic performance, analyzing by means of EF cognitive measures if working memory, inhibitory control, cognitive flexibility and categorization predict the general academic achievement of college students. A non-experimental cross-sectional study was conducted involving 104 college, who were evaluated using the Modified Wisconsisn Card Sorting Test (M-WCST), the Stroop color and word test, and working memory index from Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale WAIS-III; and the cumulative grade point average for the last academic period was recorded. A multiple hierarchical regression analysis was conducted to evaluate whether EFs contribute significantly to overall academic achievement, and the performance of EF tasks among students with low and average academic performance was compared. The results showed that the verbal working memory, cognitive flexibility and the abstraction and concept formation predict the general academic performance of college students, although they manage to explain 19,8% of the variance. A statistically significant difference was found with a median effect size between the group with low and average academic performance in the verbal working memory task. It is proposed the need to consider age as a possible mediating variable of the relationship between EF and general academic performance, and to explore other cognitive, behavioral and psychosocial variables that could be influencing in the academic performance of college student