Dr. Lundgren's Patent Applications


History and Current Status of Two Patent Applications Submitted by Carl Lundgren on Two Economic Inventions

Invention 1: "Method and Apparatus for Preventing Oligopoly Collusion," Serial No. 07/277,142, filed on November 29, 1988.

History:
Series of continuing applications. Through 2001, the patent examiners had consistently rejected the application on subject matter grounds. These subject matter grounds claim that the invention cannot be patented because it constitutes a "mathematical algorithm" and/or a "method of doing business." Through 2001, no patent examiner had examined the invention on its merits, namely whether the invention is old, obvious, useless, not clearly disclosed, or otherwise lacking in merit.

On August 9, 1994, the patent examiner rejected all claims solely on subject matter grounds. On November 23, 1998 after appeal, a three-person panel of the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences overturned the patent examiner's subject matter rejection. On December 15, 1999, the group director chose to appeal this three-person panel decision to a higher level of the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences. On July 3, 2001, before the Board had ruled on this further appeal, the case was assigned to a new patent examiner, who withdrew the appeal. The new examiner stated, "The claimed invention has been found to be directed to statutory subject matter."

After conducting an examination on the merits, the new patent examiner was forced by superiors to reject patentability based solely on subject matter grounds. This rejection was appealed on June 18, 2003. On April 20, 2004, oral argument on this second appeal was heard before a five-person panel of the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences. On September 28, 2005, the Patent and Trademark Office mailed its decision, which is both published and precedential. The five-person panel split three-to-two, with the majority favoring patentability of the subject matter. More specifically, the Board decided that there is no separate "technological arts" requirement for patentable subject matter beyond the statutory language of the patent law itself.

A pdf copy of the decision can be downloaded from my website here. Alternatively, you may download a copy of the decision, Ex parte Lundgren, directly from the Patent and Trademark Office's website at: http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/dcom/bpai/prec/

Current Status: As of November 14, 2005, it is not yet known whether a patent will issue.


Invention 2: "A Method of Motivating Unbiased Human Predictions," Serial No. 07/495,772, filed on March 19, 1990. Retitled "Method of Eliciting Unbiased Forecasts by Relating a Forecaster's Pay to the Forecaster's Contribution to a Collective Forecast" in Continuation-in-Part application (containing both old and new material), Serial No. 08/008,340, filed on January 25, 1993.

History:
Series of continuing applications, including one continuation-in-part application listed above. Until 1996, the patent examiners consistently rejected the application on subject matter grounds. These subject matter grounds claim that the invention cannot be patented because it constitutes a "mathematical algorithm" and/or a "method of doing business." No patent examiner has stated that the invention is old, obvious, useless, not clearly disclosed, or otherwise lacking in merit.

Current Status:
All 21 claims allowed. The patent was issued as U.S. Patent 5,608,620 on March 4, 1997.

For additional information, please contact ValMarPro Forecasting, Inc.

Home  |  About ValMarPro Forecasting, Inc  |  News Releases  |  The VMP Method
Opportunities For Forecasters  |  Opportunities for Promoters  |  Opportunities for Consulting Firms
Information for Clients  |  Technical Papers   |   Contact Us
©1997, 2003, 2005
ValMarPro Forecasting, Inc.