Deepak Malhotra, JD, BSEE

Inventor and US Patent Attorney

Are you looking for a partner to help protect your ideas?

Let me introduce myself. I am Deepak Malhotra. I have over 20 years experience in patent preparation and prosecution, and have successfully prosecuted hundreds of patent applications to allowance. I have worked on large portfolios for many Fortune 500 companies. Importantly, I am dedicated to strong customer service. That’s not something you experience much in the legal world – but I believe you deserve timeliness as well as quality.

(By continuing, you agree that you have read, understood, and agree to this Disclaimer and Privacy Policy.)

Deepak Malhotra, JD, BSEE

Avvo

Superb | 4 Reviews
3 Peer Endorsements
Contributor Level 11

Spokane CDA Magazine

Top Lawyers 2020 | Top Lawyers 2021
Top Lawyers 2018 | Top Lawyers 2019
Top Lawyers 2017 | Top Lawyers 2014
Top Lawyers 2016 | Top Lawyers 2013
Top Lawyers 2015 | Top Lawyers 2011

Martindale-Hubbell

5 out of 5-Preeminent
Peer Review Rated for Highest Level of Professional Excellence

ThreeBest Rated

Listed as one of the Top 3 Patent attorneys in Spokane, WA by ThreeBest Rated.

Software Patent Lawyer, Electronics Patent Attorney

Deepak Malhotra, JD, BSEE has worked extensively with various technologies including software, RF communications, sensors, smart cards, ESD protection, tape drivers, servo systems, printers, static memory cells, dynamic memory cells, database, publishing systems, virtual reality, wafer production methods, wafer polishing, antenna diversity systems, RF collision arbitration systems, marketing systems, electron multipliers, microwave electronics, digital clock recovery loops, secure network authentication systems, user interfaces, and more. Malhotra Law Firm, PLLC was a minority certified patent law firm, certified by the Northwest Mountain Minority Supplier Development Council.

 

 

Top Patent Prosecutor

Malhotra Law Firm, PLLC has experience in:

  • Protecting electrical, electronics, and mechanical inventions
  • Assisting venture-capital funded start ups & Fortune 500 companies
  • Helping foreign companies secure intellectual property protection in the U.S.
  • Protecting software inventions with software patents
  • International protection of inventions
Patents

Patents

In the language of the statute, any person who “invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvements thereof, may obtain a patent,” subject to the conditions and requirements of the law. These classes of subject matter taken together include practically everything made by man and the processes for making them.

Trademarks

Trademarks

The primary function of a trademark is to indicate origin. However, trademarks also serve to guarantee the quality of the goods or services and, through advertising, serve to create and maintain demand. Rights in a trademark are acquired by use or applying for a federal trademark registration before use.

Business Method Patent Considerations

Business Method Patent Considerations

Attitudes towards business method patents have swung back and forth like a pendulum but recently the Supreme Court has refused to deem business methods patent ineligible.  Business methods are generally eligible for patent protection if they pass a “Mayo/Alice” test.  The first part of the test is to determine whether the claims are directed to an abstract idea, a law of nature or a natural phenomenon (i.e., a judicial exception). If the claims are directed to a judicial exception, the second part of the Mayo test is to determine whether the claim recites additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. Many inventions that are thought to be business method inventions are really what I consider to be software inventions.

Software Patents

Software Patents

Like it or not, software patents are here to stay! Instead of hoping that they go away, your best defense against future potential infringement threats by others is to have an arsenal of your own. The U.S. Supreme Court, in a case known as Alice v. CLS, held that using a computer to automate a well known financial method is an unpatentable abstract idea. So what types of software inventions are patent-eligible?

How to Protect Phone Apps

How to Protect Phone Apps

Are you a smart phone app developer?  If so, you will want to know what forms of intellectual property are available for protecting smart phone apps.

Provisional Patent Applications

Provisional Patent Applications

The United States has a form of patent application called a Provisional Patent Application. Some people feel that these are an easy and inexpensive way to obtain a filing date and some patent rights, but they are usually unaware of the risks and downside.

Important Changes to U.S. Patent Law:  America Invents Act (AIA)

Important Changes to U.S. Patent Law: America Invents Act (AIA)

The United States switched from a First-to-Invent system to a First-to-File system. That makes it important to file patent applications sooner rather than later.

Conducting A Patent Novelty Search

A thorough patent search is an enormous undertaking. However, you can start with a novelty search that covers the most likely languages and places.

The History of Software Patents Blog

USC IP PARTNERSHIP V META , FEDERAL CIRCUIT 2023 (SOFTWARE PATENTS)
December 12, 2023
By Deepak Malhotra

USC brought suit for infringement against Facebook, Inc. (now Meta Platforms, Inc.), asserting that its “News Feed” feature infringes claims 1–17 of U.S. Patent No. 8,645,300.  The software patent relates to a search engine software method for predicting which webpages to recommend to a web visitor based on inferences of…

TRINITY INFO MEDIA, LLC V. COVALENT, INC., FEDERAL CIRCUIT 2023 (SOFTWARE PATENTS)
September 5, 2023
By Deepak Malhotra

Trinity Info Media, LLC sued Covalent, Inc. for infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 9,087,321 and 10,936,685 relating to methods and systems for connecting users based on their answers to polling questions. U.S. Patent No. 9,087,321 teaches that its claimed invention is “directed to a poll-based networking system that connects users…

HANTZ SOFTWARE, LLC, V SAGE INTACCT, INC., FEDERAL CIRCUIT 2023 (SOFTWARE PATENTS)
April 29, 2023
By Deepak Malhotra

Any ineligibility judgment should apply to only claims asserted in a complaint if held patent-ineligible after a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. Hantz sued Sage alleging that Sage infringed U.S. Patent Nos. 8,055,559 and 8,055,560. Sage moved to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a…

HAWK TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS, LLC, V CASTLE RETAIL, LLC, FEDERAL CIRCUIT 2023 (SOFTWARE PATENTS)
March 24, 2023
By Deepak Malhotra

A multi-format digital video product system capable of maintaining full-bandwidth resolution while providing professional quality editing and manipulation of images, which is capable of conserving bandwidth while preserving data is not patent-eligible. Appellant Hawk Technology Systems, LLC sued Appellee Castle Retail, LLC in the Western District of Tennessee for patent…

IN RE CERTAIN POLYCRYSTALLINE DIAMOND COMPACTS AND ARTICLES CONTAINING SAME, INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION 2022 (SUBJECT MATTER ELIGIBILITY)
By Deepak Malhotra

The ITC took 35 U.S.C. § 101 to its logical extreme in this case, finding that diamond drill bits with certain physical measures are not patent-eligible. The U.S. International Trade Commission conducts unfair import investigations that, most often, involve claims regarding intellectual property rights.  US Synthetic Corporation filed an ITC…

Latest News

New USPTO Director Review Rules
15 April 2024 | 9:33 pm

by Dennis Crouch

The USPTO has published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to formalize the process for Director Review of PTAB decisions. These proposed rules come in response to the Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Arthrex, Inc., 141 S. Ct. 1970 (2021), which underscored the necessity for the USPTO Director to have the ability to review PTAB decisions to comply with the Appointments Clause of the U.S. Constitution.  Of course, the USPTO has been operating under an interim procedure for Director Review that began soon after Arthrex, but has been updated a couple of times.  The NPRM closely follows the most recent version of the interim rules. [2024-07759]

The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act of 2011 (the AIA) provided the PTAB authority to decide challenges to patents in various proceedings, including inter partes reviews (IPRs) and post grant reviews (PGRs). In Arthrex, the Supreme Court held that for the PTAB’s structure to be constitutional under the Appointments Clause, the Director must have the ability to review final written decisions made by Administrative Patent Judges (APJs) in IPR proceedings. The Court stated, “the Director may review final PTAB decisions and, upon review, may issue decisions [] on behalf of the Board” and that “[w]hat matters is that the Director have the discretion to review decisions rendered by APJs.” Id.

Continue reading New USPTO Director Review Rules at Patently-O.

Patentee’s Unclean Hands
15 April 2024 | 5:40 pm
Patentee’s Unclean Hands

by Dennis Crouch

The Federal Circuit’s new decision in Luv’N’Care, Ltd. (LNC) v. Laurain and EZPZ, relies on the doctrine of unclean hands to deny relief to the patentee (Laurain and EZPZ), affirming the district court’s judgment.  The appellate panel also vacated and remanded the district court’s finding that LNC failed to prove the asserted patent is unenforceable due to inequitable conduct during prosecution, as well as its grant of summary judgment one of the asserted patents was invalid as obvious.  U.S. Patent No. 9,462,903. The case here involves bowls/plates attached to a mat to help avoid spills and for easy cleanup. 22-1905.OPINION.4-12-2024_2300689.

Unclean Hands: The doctrine of unclean hands is an equitable defense that bars a party from obtaining relief when they have engaged in misconduct related to the subject matter of the litigation. As the Supreme Court explained in Keystone Driller Co. v. General Excavator Co., 290 U.S. 240 (1933), the doctrine applies “where some unconscionable act [by the party seeking] relief has immediate and necessary relation to the equity that he seeks in respect of the matter in litigation.” The Federal Circuit has further clarified that the misconduct must bear an “immediate and necessary relation” to the claims at issue, and the doctrine should not be used merely to punish a wrongdoer.

Continue reading Patentee’s Unclean Hands at Patently-O.

What I’m doing with LLM-Based GenAI Tools
14 April 2024 | 2:33 pm
What I’m doing with LLM-Based GenAI Tools

by Dennis Crouch

As many of you know, I have done machine learning work for many years — starting in the 1990s while in college.  However, like most of the world, I have been surprised and amazed by the power of LLM-based GenAI technology and have been trying to figure out ways to use it both for patent practice and in my job as a law professor.  I hope that it helps me become both more effective and more efficient.

On the Patently-O side, I have been honing my approach somewhat. I tried to have a GenAI tool (like ChatGPT or Claude) simply write a blog post for me, but those attempts largely failed because the results lacked insight, and the tools continue to make up wrong answers (i.e., hallucinate).  My approach recently has been to first write a draft blog post myself, then refine it with insights from a GenAI — I typically seek input on any errors in my post and suggestions on what else I might have said.  I also have been using these tools for small idea generation if I ever have writer’s block. Although I write one or more blog posts almost every day, I also have about 1,000 unfinished posts, many of which I have been sitting dormant because I wasn’t quite sure how to wrap up. 

Continue reading What I’m doing with LLM-Based GenAI Tools at Patently-O.

While one of only three Electrical Engineer attorneys at his previous firm, the firm was ranked #2 in the U.S. for quality of Electrical Patents by PatentRatings, LLC. Deepak Malhotra has developed relationships with litigators and has assisted clients with aggressive enforcement of intellectual property. Software patents, business method patents, electrical patents, and mechanical patents are his specialties.

Deepak Malhotra Is Not Just A Patent Attorney,
He Is An Inventor Too, With Two U.S. Patents In His Name.