Case Analysis : § 101

1.3. In order to estimate the peso discount rate, assume that the International Fisher Effect (IFE) holds. Groupe Ariel's Euro hurdle rate for a project of this type was 8%. Assume that inflation rates are expected to be 7% in Mexico and 3% in France.

When a law enforcement officer or other public employee is accused of potentially criminal conduct, they may face three different kinds of interviews or interrogations. If an officer is interviewed as a criminal suspect, they have the absolute right to decline to answer any questions, or to insist that they have a lawyer of their choosing to attend the interview. The first is type is during a criminal investigation; the second is during a disciplinary investigation and finally during the course of civil litigation where there has been damages. During a criminal interview, there is no professional, ethical or moral duty to participate especially without the assistance of an attorney to represent the officer under investigation. It has come to a surprise that many experienced officers will waive their right to silence and give the investigators an audio recorded statement. Some of the inexperienced criminals do not make incriminating statements. The motive for cooperation is to avoid unfavorable publicity.

227 Kan. 780; 610 P. 2d 580; 1980 Kan. LEXIS 280; 28 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. (Callaghan) 1362

Protection of intellectual property are investments based on acquired knowledge, thought and effort by one or multiple individuals on behalf of themselves, the business they work for when the property is created, and a financial investment. Each of these – acquired knowledge, thought, physical effort, financial investment – have a value that can be attached as it relates the usefulness or importance of the resulting product. That value will have a level of importance to the individual(s) creating the product and if applicable, the investor providing the funds in support of the creation.

In 2004 Mayo Collaborative Services and Mayo Clinic Rochester (Mayo) announced that they would be releasing a diagnostic test that utilizes thiopurine drugs to treat autoimmune diseases. Mayo’s announcement came after they had purchased and utilized similar diagnostic tests based on Prometheus Laboratories, Inc. (Prometheus) patents. After Mayo’s Prometheus sued Mayo claiming patent infringement. This paper will examine the Mayo Collaborative Services v Prometheus Laboratories, Inc. case that refers to the patent infringement law. We will examine both sides of the case by exploring Diamond v. Diehr, Mackay Radio & Telegraph Co. v. Radio Corp. of America, Bilski v. Kappos, and Parker v. Flook’s relationship with the case. This paper will ultimately conclude in favor of Mayo because Prometheus’ patents effectively claim natural laws and are therefore not patent eligible.

In the U.S. Code section 101 of title 35, the patent law allows for a patent on inventions and discoveries on machine, manufacture, or useful improvement, but it rejects anything involving laws of nature, natural phenomena, or abstract ideas. In the legal case, Bilski v. Kappos (2010), the Supreme Court was forced to find a new set of rules on software patenting. The case was over a software that used a mathematical formula to minimize risks from fluctuations in market demand. Before the case, patenting for software dragged on in court due to the Patent Act 101 machine or transformation test. Under that test, a patent is eligible if it involves a machine or apparatus or if it transforms something into a different state. The patent was rejected under 101 because it was too abstract and not an invention. Following the case, the Supreme Court examined the machine or transformation test and acknowledged that the test is not the only way to find if a patent is eligible. The ruling opened up more opportunities to define new processes for patenting software.

Mueller states a working requirement bears the expectation of forcing a patentee to manufacture domestically, thereby eventually increase capital investment and job creation. She argues that this requirement is only facially equally applied, but de facto discriminates against foreign patentees. Therefore, according to this view, the “requirement” violates article 27.1 of the TRIPS Agreement and the legislation is aimed to protect and create incentives for indigenous industry. This argument follows the conclusion of discriminatory treatment between foreigners and domestic industry. Regarding this point of view, the IPAB ruled that the Controller did not discriminate against a foreign patentee in its Bayer v. Natco opinion, because the patent was granted.

This case discusses Cross-Border valuation of projects. This kind of analysis is common for companies that are operating in many countries. Groupe Ariel is one such company that is considering investing in a project in its own subsidiary in Mexico. The company manufactures and sells printers, copiers and other document production equipment in many countries. As far as, expansion into new markets is concerned, company is very slow in taking initiatives as compared to its competitors owing to the recent recession. But the management of the company believes that better durability and lower after-sales service costs of their products enable

The U.S. constitution gave Congress the power to “ promote the devellopment of the useful arts” by granting exclusive rights to inventers for a limited period of time. The purpose of a patent was to assurre the rights of the creators in exchange for not keeping these inventions secret, thus overall knowledge base grows.

In the past, the booming economy had allowed for year to year increase in their sales because people had larger discretionary incomes. But due to the recession, smaller independent retailers had to markdown their items in order to stay in business because designer outlet stores are getting more traffic; so will Harry Rosen follow in suit? Or in order to maintain the integrity of the quality products they offer, will they continue their higher pricing and settle for a lower market share?

Until the early 1980’s, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office refused to grant patents for computer software. However, a U.S. Supreme Court decision in 1981 forced the Patent and Trademark Office to begin considering software patents. In the case of Diamond v. Diehr, the Supreme Court ruled that an invention related to curing rubber could be patented. Even though the company’s innovation was the use of a computer to control the heating of the rubber, the invention was a new process for rubber molding, and hence patentable.

Tanya is a 21-year-old African American female who was referred by Southern Psychiatric Unit after she called 911 as a result of beings annoyed with her family and co-workers. She complained that her employer puts her in places to do paperwork and not giving her 70 hours a week. They were cutting her hours from 10 to 6 a day. She reported that she was feeling suicidal when she called 911. Prior to calling 911, Tanya reported that her baby father Derrick is in her brain singing and rapping all of the time. She reported that Derrick works at Taco Bell. She reports that she had to have sex with Derrick in order to quiet down his voice; however, if she has sex with others, the voices would get louder.

Cross-functional teams are vital in many businesses, because it increases productivity, enhances communication between departments, and leads to overall success in a company. Boldflash is a company that has fallen behind on this front, and is thus struggling to keep up with its competitors. Roger Cahill, the new vice president of the Mobile Division, is faced with the challenge of finding a way to restructure the departments in his division in order to increase productivity and improve the product development process.

In the U.S., when examining a patent application with claims directed to novel chemical compounds, an examiner may reject those claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as obvious over structurally similar compounds in the prior art. In In re Hass,1the Federal Circuit held that “structural obviousness” is a presumption of obviousness. However, this presumption can be rebutted if the applicant is able to show the property of the claimed compound is different from the prior art compound. The court held that a prima facie case of obviousness is not made unless the claimed invention is “structurally similar.”2 The Federal Circuit established the Hass-Henze test to whther the prima facie case of obviousness may be rebutted.3 It is necessary for a plaintiff to demonstrate that (1) that the claimed compound or composition possesses unexpectedly improved properties over the prior art or properties not actually

Mr. Alfaro Burgos, the vice president for sales of Dyners Corporation. It is a family firm that manufactures stainless steel and silver plated tableware. After some time, the inventory of the company showed a shortage. He discovered some mispacking of silver plated tableware in the warehouse of the corporation. He hired an industrial security firm to investigate the deprivation in the warehouse. It did not take long for the agent to discover the truth. Karlo Deles, the warehouse supervisor was the man behind the internal