SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

References

  • Abraham, E. (2011). Bilski v. Kappos: Sideline analysis from the first inning of play. Berkeley Technology Law Journal, 26, 1566.
  • Ahlemann, F. (2009). Towards a conceptual reference model for project management information systems. International Journal of Project Management, 27(1), 1930.
  • Ali, A. S. B., Anbari, F. T., & Money, W. H. (2008). Impact of organizational and project factors on acceptance and usage of project management software and perceived project success. Project Management Journal, 39(2), 533.
  • Anantatmula, V., & Thomas, M. (2010). Managing global projects: A structured approach for better performance. Project Management Journal, 41(2), 6072.
  • Arain, F. M. (2008). IT-based approach for effective management of project changes: A change management system (CMS). Advanced Engineering Informatics, 22(4), 457472.
  • Benjaoran, V. (2009). A cost control system development: A collaborative approach for small and medium-sized contractors. International Journal of Project Management, 27(3), 270277.
  • Beresford, K. (2001). European patents for software, E-commerce and business model inventions. World Patent Information, 23(3), 253263.
  • Besner, C., & Hobbs, B. (2012). An empirical identification of project management toolsets and a comparison among project types. Project Management Journal, 43(5), 2446.
  • Blind, K., Edler, J., Frietsch, R., & Schmoch, U. (2003). Erfindungen kontra patente: Schwerpunktstudie ˝zur technologischen Leistungsfähigkeit Deutschlands”. Karlsruhe: Fraunhofer-Institut für Systemtechnik und Innovationsforschung.
  • Bonilla, R. (2011). Patented lie: Analyzing the worthiness of business method patents after Bilski v. Kappos, Texas Tech Law Review, 43, 12851318.
  • Boscaljon, B., Filbeck, G., & Smaby, T. (2006). Information content of business methods patents. Financial Review, 41(3), 387404.
  • Bradstreet, R. S. (2013). United States v Business Method Patents: Trial by trial and error. Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 8(5), 374382.
  • Chen, C. C., Law, C., Yang, S. C. (2009). Managing ERP implementation failure: A project management perspective. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 56(1), 157170.
  • Chou, J., Chen, H., Hou, C., & Lin, C. (2010). Visualized EVM system for assessing project performance. Automation in Construction, 19(5), 596607.
  • Chou, J., Cheng, M., Wu, Y., & Wu, C. (2012). Forecasting enterprise resource planning software effort using evolutionary support vector machine inference model. International Journal of Project Management, 30(8), 967977.
  • Cooke-Davies, T. J., Crawford, L. H., & Lechler, T.G. (2009). Project management systems: Moving project management from an operational to a strategic discipline. Project Management Journal, 40(1), 110123.
  • Criscuolo, P. (2006). The “home advantage” effect and patent families: A comparison of OECD triadic patents, the USPTO and the EPO. Scientometrics, 66(1), 2341.
  • Dawson, C. W. (2007). The project life-cycle. In J.R. Turner (Ed.), Gower handbook of project management (pp. 527546). Aldershot, England: Gower.
  • European Patent Office (EPO). (2010). European Patent Convention, 14th ed., Germany.
  • Evans, D. S., & Layne-Farrar, A. (2004). Software patents and open source: The battle over intellectual property rights. Virginia Journal of Law and Technology, 9(10).
  • Feng, J., Song, X., & Li, M. (2008). Research on IT project management system, wireless communications, networking and mobile computing, 2008. WiCOM ‘08. 4th International Conference.
  • Fischer, T., & Henkel, J. (2012). Patent trolls on markets for technology: An empirical analysis of NPEs’ patent acquisitions. Research Policy, 41(9), 15191533.
  • Gardiner, A., Giemsa, F., Machek, J., & Closa, D. (2010). Patent law for computer scientists: Steps to protect computer-implemented inventions. Heidelberg, Germany: Springer.
  • Gassmann, O., & Bader, M. A. (2011). Patentmanagement: Innovationen erfolgreich nutzen und schützen. Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag.
  • Grandstrand, O. (2004). Innovation and intellectual property rights. In J. Fagerberg, D.C. Mowery, & R.R. Nelson (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of innovation (pp. 266290). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
  • Grant, R. M. (1991). The resource-based theory of competitive advantage: Implications for strategy formulation. California Management Review, University of California.
  • Grant, R. M. (2008). Contemporary strategy analysis. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
  • Guo, H., Li, H., & Skitmore, M. (2010). Life-cycle management of construction projects based on virtual prototyping technology. Journal of Management in Engineering, 26(1), 4147.
  • Hussain, Z., Barber, K., & Hussain, N. (2009). An Intranet based system as an enabler in effective project management and implementation of quality standards: A case study. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 26(3), 196210.
  • Kastor, A., & Sirakoulis, K. (2009). The effectiveness of resource levelling tools for resource constraint project scheduling problem. International Journal of Project Management, 27(5), 493500.
  • Komulainen, M., & Takalo, T. (2011). Does State Street lead to Europe? The case of financial exchange innovations, European Financial Management, 137.
  • Kujala, S., Artto, K., Aaltonen, P., & Turkulainen, V. (2010). Business models in project-based firms: Towards a typology of solution-specific business models. International Journal of Project Management, 28(2), 96106.
  • Kwak, Y. H., & Anbari, F. T. (2009). Analyzing project management research: Perspectives from top management journals. International Journal of Project Management, 27(5), 435446.
  • Lemley, M. A., Risch, M., Sichelman, T., & Wagner, R. P. (2010). Life after Bilski. Stanford Law Review, 63, 13151348.
  • Lerner, J. (2005). Trolls on State Street? The litigation of financial patents, 1976–2005. Toulouse Network for Information Technology, 134.
  • Lester, A. (2007). Project management, planning and control: Managing engineering, construction and manufacturing projects to PMI, APM and BSI standards. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Butterworth-Heinemann/Elsevier.
  • Marsnik, S. J., & Thomas, R. E. (2011). Drawing a line in the patent subject-matter sands: Does Europe provide a solution to the software and business method patent problem? Boston College International and Comparative Law Review, 34(2), 227327.
  • Martin, N. L., & Mykytyn, P. P., Jr. (2009). Evaluating the financial performance of business method patent owners. Information Systems Management, 26(3), 285301.
  • Mehta, M. H., & Moskowitz, L. E. (2004). Business method patents: A judicial history and the legislative response. The Sughrue Review, 117.
  • Meyer, M. M., & Ahlemann, F. (2010). Project management software systems: Requirements, selection process and products. Würzburg: Business Application Research Center.
  • Moehrle, M. G., Walter, L., & Bergmann, I. (2009). Monitoring von Geschäftsprozessen und Geschäftsprozess-Patenten. In M.G. Moehrle, & L.Walter (Eds.), Patentierung von Geschäftsprozessen (pp. 75100). Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag.
  • Möller, T., & Dörrenberg, F. (2003). Projektmanagement. München, Germany: Oldenbourg.
  • Morris, P. W. G., Pinto, J. K., & Soederlund, J. (2011). The Oxford handbook of project management. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
  • Niemann, H., Moehrle, M. G., & Walter, L. (2013). The development of business method patenting in the logistics industry–insights from the case of intelligent sensor networks. International Journal of Technology Management, 61(2), 177197.
  • Parchomovsky, G., & Wagner, R. P. (2005). Patent portfolios. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 154(1), 177.
  • PatentFreedom. (2012). Largest patent holdings. Retrieved from https://www.patentfreedom.com/about-npes/holdings/
  • Project Management Institute. (2004). A guide to the project management body of knowledge (PMBOK® guide). Newtown Square, PA: Author.
  • Raymond, L., & Bergeron, F. (2008). Project management information systems: An empirical study of their impact on project managers and project success. International Journal of Project Management, 26(2), 213220.
  • Rosenberg, M. D., & Apley, R. J. (2012). Business method and software patents: A practical guide. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
  • Sakata, J. (2012). Business method patent strategy portfolios: Analysis of the Japanese main information providers. International Journal of Intellectual Property Management, 5(2), 134161.
  • Salem, O., & Mohanty, S. (2008). Project management practices and information technology research. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 134(7), 501508.
  • Schelle, H., Ottmann, R., & Pfeiffer, A. (2006). Project manager (1st ed). Nürnberg: GPM, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Projektmanagement.
  • Schellekens, M. (2010). Patenting nanotechnology in Europe: Making a good start? An analysis of issues in law and regulation. The Journal of World Intellectual Property, 13(1), 4776.
  • Schneider, M. (2010). Ansatzpunkte des Competence-Based View zur Bekämpfung von (Produkt-) Piraterie. In M. Stephan (Ed.), 25 Jahre ressourcen-und kompetenzorientierte Forschung (pp. 139163). Wiesbaden, Germany: Gabler.
  • Supreme Court of the United States (Supreme Court). (2010b). Bernard L. Bilski and Rand A. Warsaw v. David J. Kappos, 561 U.S.
  • Tayntor, C. B. (2010). Project management tools and techniques for success. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
  • Trautmann, N., & Baumann, P. (2009). Project scheduling with precedence constraints and scarce resources: An experimental analysis of commercial project management software. Berlin, Germany: Springer.
  • Trietsch, D., & Baker, K. R. (2012). PERT 21: Fitting PERT/CPM for use in the 21st century. International Journal of Project Management, 30(4), 490502.
  • United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Fed. Cir.). (1998b). State Street Bank & Trust Co. v. Signature Financial Group, Inc., 149 F.3d 1368.
  • United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Fed. Cir.). (2008). In re Bernard L. Bilski and Rand A. Warsaw, 545 F.3d 943, 88 U.S.P.Q.2d 1385.
  • United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). (2007). Patent Laws. Retrieved from http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/consolidated_laws.pdf
  • United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). (2010). Overview of the U.S. Patent Classification System (USPC). Retrieved from http://www.uspto.gov/patents/resources/classification/overview.pdf
  • United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). (2012a). Classes in the U.S. Patent Classification System—Dates Established. Retrieved from http://www.uspto.gov/patents/resources/classification/numeric/classes_534_987.jsp
  • United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). (2012b). USPTO Patent Full-Text and Image Database. Retrieved from http://patft.uspto.gov/netahtml/PTO/search-adv.htm
  • United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). (2012c). Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP). 1121 Content of a Patent Application Publication [R-5], Alexandria (Virginia).
  • United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). (2013). Class 705 Application Filing and Patents Issued Data. Retrieved from http://www.uspto.gov/patents/resources/methods/applicationfiling.jsp
  • Wagner, S. (2008). Business method patents in Europe and their strategic use: Evidence from franking device manufacturers. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 17(3), 173194.
  • Walter, L., & Gundrum, U. (2009). Grundlagen der Patentierung von Geschäftsprozessen. In M.G. Moehrle & L. Walter (Eds.), Patentierung von Geschäftsprozessen (pp. 1140). Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag.
  • Walter, L., & Moehrle, M.G. (2009). Grundlagen der Patentierung von Geschäftsprozessen. In M.G. Moehrle & L. Walter, (Eds.), Patentierung von Geschäftsprozessen (pp. 4174). Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag.
  • Wasiak, J., Hicks, B., Newnes, L., Loftus, C., Dong, A., & Burrow, L. (2011). Managing by e-mail: What e-mail can do for engineering project management, engineering management. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 58(3), 445456.
  • Wells, M. G. (2001). Internet business method patent policy. Virginia Law Review, 87(4), 729780.
  • Wikström, K., Artto, K., Kujala, J., & Söderlund, J. (2010). Business models in project business. International Journal of Project Management, 28(8), 832841.

References

  • Maestle, W.A. (2007). Machine-implementable project finance analysis and negotiating tool software, method and system. Retrieved from http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=7177834.PN.&OS=PN/7177834&RS=PN/7177834
  • Supreme Court of the United States (Supreme Court). (1981). Diamond v. Diehr, et al., 450 U.S. 175.
  • Supreme Court of the United States (Supreme Court). (2010a). Bernard L. Bilski and Rand A. Warsaw v. David J. Kappos, 561 U.S.
  • United States Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit (Circuit Courts). (1908). Hotel Security Checking Co. vs. Lorraine Co., 160 F 467.
  • United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Fed. Cir.). (1998a). State Street Bank & Trust Co. v. Signature Financial Group, Inc., 149 F.3d 1368.
  • United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). (1949). Examination of Applications. Non based on prior art. Nonstatutory subject matter, Manual of Patent Examining Procedures (MPEP).