Tuesday, June 30, 2015

Oh, patents! I. Miller & Sons shoes (1)

Copyright © Françoise Herrmann

So what’s patented in the I. Miller and Sons shoes?

First, all of the patents retrieved are for ladies shoes, whether low shoes or higher heeled shoes, pumps or slippers. Secondly, the inventions respond to a concern for shoe comfort and fit. Even US2163696, which discloses a Method of making cemented shoes, arises out of a concern for the flexibility of the forefoot sole, once the adhesive film connecting the inner and outer soles has hardened, and the need for a shoe manufacturing method for applying a very thin film adhesive, instead of the prior art, thick and viscous layers of proxylin or celluloid cement. Finally, the I. Miller and Sons patents also respond to various manufacturing problems whether it is to resolve prior art issues of “lasting” or to introduce new “lasts” to implement the fit and comfort innovations. A “last” is the form, in the shape foot, on which a shoe is repaired or manufactured. To “last” a shoe is the process of repairing or manufacturing using a “last”.

The patent US2138385 A titled Elastic top shoe, is a good example that combines both comfort and manufacturing inventions for ladies shoes, in this case slip-ons or pumps.  This is also a patent retrieved where the inventor appears  recorded as Ida Gordon Miller. And where, upon closer examination, it is explicitly stated in the patent document that the inventor was Charles Miller and that the patent was assigned to Ida Gordon Miller, the Executrix of the Charles Miller estate, who then became herself assignor, when she assigned the patent to the I. Miller and Sons company, as follows:
“Charles Miller, Long Island City, N. Y.; Ida. Gordon Miller, executrix of said Charles Miller, deceased, assignor to I. Miller and Sons, Inc., Long Island City; N. Y., a corporation of New York.”
The issue of comfort addressed in the patent US2138385, titled Elastic top shoe arises from the necessity of having a snug fitting shoe around the heel and forefoot when the shoe is flexed, without resorting to binding or straps that can become cutting and painful at the level of the instep.  In response to this issue, the invention discloses a substantial part of the shoe upper made of a fabric material woven with elastic threads (Lastex), through which the foot is introduced.  Thus, the shoe is no longer manufactured with straps or other methods of binding, especially at the level of the instep (or arch). There is also a special emphasis on comfort at the rear of the shoe, above the heel, where the edges the prior art shoes tend to cut.

The invention makes clever use of the properties of elastic materials where one side, called the weft of the material, is always more elastic than the other, called the warp. Thus the assembled upper contains elastic material parallel to the warp on the side of the shoe, where less elasticity is required, whereas the weft of the material is positioned transversally across the shoe where more elasticity is required to accommodate the in-step.

The other important aspect of the invention concerns a method of lasting the elastic upper with the rest of the leather upper and shoe.  On the one hand, this aspect of the invention aims to prevent the elastic part from losing its shape once it is removed from the last where it was stretched. And, on the other hand, this aspect resolves the use of binding tape (which is not elastic) for the purposes of attaching the elastic upper to the rest of the leather upper and shoe.

The included patent drawing shows such a shoe with an elastic upper (13) mounted on the last (11).  

So, indeed the shoe(s) perdu(s) were very patented both for added comfort and to resolve  specific manufacturing issues connected to the innovative and added shoe comfort. 

Sunday, June 28, 2015

Surprise!... The I. Miller & Sons shoes were patented!

Copyright © Françoise Herrmann

Indeed...even if they are now expired, many patents were associated with the I. Miller & Sons shoes that Andy Warhol was hired to advertise! Whether it was the shoe upper structure, the shoe soles, the shoe shank, the shoe heel, the manufacturing lasts or various protective coatings, the shoe(s) perdu(s) were definitely patented!

It appears that the inventor was Charles Miller who assigned some of his patents to I. Miller & Sons. However, Charles Miller died in the process, and thus many of the patents were actually granted to Ida Gordon Miller, Executrix of the Charles Miller Estate. This is stated on the original patent documents granted to Ida Gordon Miller (e.g.; US2138385 & US2111935 , both of which were also assigned to I. Miller & Sons).

Both design and utility patents were granted, and a few patents were also filed in Canada. A couple of patents were assigned to Charles Miller by Max Feinstein (e.g.; US 1693398 and US 1693397)
 Andy Warhol - My shoe is your shoe

So, indeed, the shoe(s) perdu(s) were very patented shoes!

In fact, I. Miller & Sons was a large and very popular shoe manufacturing company. When the founder, Israel Miller, died in August 1929, the company was worth 8 million USD, with 16 retail shops in New York City, 200 agencies across the US, and 2 shoe manufacturing factories! [JTA, 1929]. In 1929, this was considered a small empire.

The following is a hyperlinked list of the utility and design patents retrieved in connection with I. Miller and Sons shoes, using different search engines: EspaceNet at the EPO, Google Patents and FPO (Free Patents online).  Remember that various available patent search engines often retrieve different results as each has negotiated varied access to the patent databases belonging to different patent offices worldwide. Additionally, different results are sometimes obtained due to incomplete or inaccurate data input, or OCR (Optical character Recognition) error when the  documents were scanned.

Utility patents
US2138385 A - Elastic top shoe filed March 5, 1935 and granted on November 29, 1938
US2111935 A Shoe filed Jan. 7, 1935 and granted on March 22, 1938
US 2163696 A - Method of making cemented shoes filed Nov.. 19, 1934  and granted on June 27, 1939.
US2072838 A - Last and last attachment filed Nov. 12, 1934, and granted on March 2, 1937
US2134196 A - Protective cover for shoes filed March 9, 1936, and granted on Oct. 25, 1938
US2069964 A - Shoe and tongue therefore filed April 8, 1935, and granted on Feb. 9, 1937
US2102804 A - Method of applying protective coatings to shoes another other aspects filed Jan 21, 1935, and granted on Dec. 21, 1937
US1807792  - Shoe, filed  Nov 1930  and granted on June 2, 1931, to Charles Miller and Arthur Livers
US1693398 A -  Therapeutic shoe filed July 7, 1927, and granted on Nov. 27, 1928
US1693397 A - Shoe last filed March 3, 1927, and granted on Nov. 27, 1928
CA284349 A - Shoe last 
CA273434 A - Demonstrating shoe sample 
CA270663  A - Shoe shank 
CA270661 A - Shoe heel 

Design patents
USD86397 - Design for a shoe, filed December 29, 1931, granted March 1, 1932, to Charles Miller
USD86925 - Design for a shoe, filed Feb. 5, 1932, granted May 10, 1932, to Charles Miller
USD86393 Design for a shoe, filed Dec. 29, 1931, granted March 1, 1932, to Charles Miller
USD86796  - Design for a shoe, filed Feb. 18, 1932, granted April 19, 1932, to Charles Miller


Herrmann, F. (2014) Design and utility patents - What's the difference? at Patents on the soles of your shoes 
I. Miller, shoe manufacturer, dies (Aug. 15, 1929) Jewish Telegraphic Agency
I. Miller & Sons

Saturday, June 27, 2015

Found... Warhol's shoe perdu (3)

Copyright © Françoise Herrmann

On the third floor of the NYC MOMA...

Andy Warhol An autobiography A alice B. Shoe.

Drawing from the series À la recherche du shoe perdu, a portfolio of 18 lithographs, hand-colored at parties. 

Friday, June 26, 2015

Found... Warhol's shoe perdu (2)

Copyright © Françoise Herrmann

On the third floor of the NYC MOMA...

Andy Warhol - Shoe of the evening, beautiful shoe

Another selection from a portfolio of 18 offset lithographs. The captions of the prints with distinctive cursive writing were written by Andy Warhol's mom, Julia Warhola. 

Wednesday, June 24, 2015

Interlude...Found. Warhol's shoe perdu.....(1)

Copyright © Françoise Herrmann

On the third floor of the NYC MOMA …

Andy Warhol À la recherche du shoe perdu c. 1955

Andy Warhol’s À la recherche du shoe perdu…!
Between 1955 and 1957, Warhol was the sole illustrator of the shoe manufacturing company I. Miller. The shoe drawings were published as advertisements in The New York Times each week.  Above, one drawing of a portfolio of 18 offset lithographs...

Sunday, June 21, 2015

Oh, patents! Lovesac sacs

Copyright © Françoise Herrmann

Before Lovesac began marketing the versatile Sactionals, it was a gigantic puffy pillow packaged in a sac called a Lovesac that launched the company.
The original Lovesac is a huge, XXXXL bean-bag-looking item, packaged in a relatively small cubic duffle sac, that you are pressed to never call a bean-bag because it contains no polystyrene beads…! Rather, it is filled with premium shredded foam, called Durafoam, discarded from couch manufacturing, which makes it quite possibly the most comfortable pillow chair/sofa/bed on the face of the earth!
The largest of the Lovesac sacs is the original size, on which a couple of adults can comfortably sit or even lie down.  Since the original Lovesac, the product line includes a total of 6 sibling Lovesacs, of increasingly smaller size (from 88 to 6 cubic feet), the smallest of which accommodates a child. The Lovesac covers come in hundreds of fabrics, all of which (except leather) are machine washable.

©  Lovesac
The packaging method of the Lovesacs, called compressible furniture in technical terms, is patented. The patent US2004107675 titled Packaged furniture assembly and method thereof for compressible furniture discloses this invention.
Relying on a packaging method, the Lovesac invention generally addresses issues of shipment, transportation and storage for bulky furniture, such as sofas and beds, and in particular, for compressible furniture. The patented packaging method invokes vacuuming the air out of the bladder containing the compressible material of the furniture, and thus reducing the size and volume of the furniture. For example, once air-vacuumed, the largest pieces of compressible furniture are reduced to 5 % of their original volume, the intermediate pieces to 8 % and the small pieces to 10 %. This means that a large piece of compressible furniture, with about 86 cubic feet, is reduced to approximately 4 cubic feet!
As a result, once the air is vacuumed out of the Lovesacs, the sacs can be neatly packaged into duffle bags, that are in turn easily stacked, shipped, stored and transported. 
Thus, beyond the comfort and practicality of these puffy pieces of furniture, it is the packaging that is patented, which perhaps explains the brand-name term “sac”, in both the Sactional and the Lovesac. Even though both furniture packaging issues are resolved very differently, with a Lego™-inspired assembly system for the hardwood frame Sactional, and with vacuum for the shredded Durafoam Lovesac, this furniture is also all about mobility in a mobile world! In other words, it's about bringing home your sofa (or Sactional) in a sac...!
Below, you will find the abstract for US2004107675 titled Packaged furniture assembly and method thereof for compressible furniture, and one of the patent figures showing different vacuuming forces, suctioning the air out of the furniture bladder.
The present invention provides a chair having a removable outer cover. The chair has an air permeable bladder which houses compressible filler material. The compressible filler material allows the chair to be selectively compressed between various compressed states. A method for packaging the chair is provided which significantly reduces the weight and size of the chair. The method includes placing the chair in a vacuum chamber and suctioning air from the chair. The vacuum chamber may be partially open or closed during storage. [Abstract US2004107675]
Lovesac -- www.lovesac.com
Herrmann, F (2015) Oh, patents! Sactionals posted at Patents on the soles of your shoes (June 20, 2015) 
US2004107675 Packaged furniture assembly and method thereof for compressible furniture

Saturday, June 20, 2015

Oh, patents! Sactionals

Copyright © Françoise Herrmann

Is there a sectional in your media room called a Sactional? Is it reconfigurable, washable, changeable, durable, and super comfortable? If so, then you might be pleased to know that your Sactional, manufactured by Lovesac is a patented sectional sofa system, inspired by Legos™ and informed by practicality!

The WIPO patent WO2006135855 titled Modular furniture assembly discloses the Sactional invention.  This invention resolves several problems of the prior art in sofa/sectional furniture. The first is an issue of furniture assembly. Hardwood-frame sofas are typically massive pieces of furniture, assembled with hardware and nails, that are not readily disassembled, and thus not easily transported from one location to another, moved from one room to another, or changeable from one configuration or dimension  to another. It follows also that sofas/sectionals are also not easily shipped in containers as they cannot easily be stacked without damage to maximize the use of space, thus contributing to costs. The second issue of the prior art is that hardwood-frame sofa upholstery is not typically removable and washable, and thus not easily and inexpensively changeable or resistant to the assaults of everyday use.

The Sactional invention resolves the issues of furniture assembly with a modular assembly system comprising a base and a transverse piece that can be easily, swiftly and effortlessly coupled and decoupled, in different ways, and to other bases and transverse pieces, without any tools, using a simple Lego™-inspired interlocking system. Thus, the Sactional is easily assembled and disassembled for shipment, storage (at retailers), transportation and moving. And it is also easily and variously configurable  as an ottoman, a bench, an armchair, a chaise, a loveseat, deep sofa or sectional of different dimensions and configurations (L-, T-, M-, W-shaped, twister, playpen...) or even as a bed!. Additionally, regardless of the configuration, the Sactional is also easily upholstered, using any one of hundreds of removable, and machine-washable covers! Just add seat and back pillows (also with removable and washable covers) and the Sactional, in whatever configuration, is ready-to-use! There are also provisions for the Sactional to be manufactured in children sizes.

Below, you will find the abstract for patent WO2006135855 titled Modular furniture assembly and two of the patent drawings: the Lego™-inspired interlocking system used to bring together a base and transverse piece or to connect them to other bases or transverse pieces in rock-solid configurations,  and a base and transverse piece coupled using the Lego™-inspired interlocking system.  

Lego-inspired interlocking system
[Abstract WO2006135855]
The invention relates to a modular furniture assembly that is convenient and versatile. One embodiment of the modular furniture assembly comprises a base and a transverse member manually, detachably coupled to the base by a coupler. The base and the transverse member have a defined spatial relationship which enables a variety of different types, configurations and sizes of furniture assemblies to be formed therefrom. Further, the base is configured such that the transverse member can be coupled to the base in a first position to form a first furniture assembly, and can be coupled to the base in a second position to form a second furniture assembly. 
Base and transverse assembled

Lovesac - www.Lovesac.com
Modular furniture assembly WO2006135855

Friday, June 19, 2015

Oh, Patents! Literal translation, AARGH!

Copyright © Françoise Herrmann

Asking otherwise perfectly calm and composed NYU graduate students and professional translators to translate their patents literally invariably invokes disbelief and an ARGHH reaction!. “You gotta be kidding,  com’on, this is a joke…” Just about everything you learn in translation is about avoiding the pitfalls of being literal… so being literal is way out of line! Everyone knows that being literal generates translations   like “it’s raining strings” instead of “cats and dogs”. And that just won’t do, right?

Well, not quite…! The US Courts and Public Administrations of the State of California [e.g. the CA Medical Board], in particular, require “literal, word for word” translations, and if you argue with a judge or the Clerk of the Court, you may as well go home and do your laundry.

So indeed you may be screaming inside …

The trouble is that the Courts and Public Administrations of the State of California are hardly wacky, and their requests are legitimate.  So, how do you reconcile all that you hold as true about language and translation with what the Courts are requesting? Especially when literal translation is almost a dirty word in your profession…!

Fortunately, someone has already done the leg-work and saved the day.

In a beautiful article titled “Literal translation of patents” (Cross, 2007), Martin Cross outlines the linguistic parameters of literal translation -- acceptable to both parties. And in the process, he  reconciles the intolerable notion of the absurd associated with literal translation from the translator’s perspective, with the very real, effective, prevailing and uncontestable request for literal, word for word translation coming in from the Courts and Public Administrations.

In a nutshell Cross argues that to be literal in patent translation, translators must follow 6 rules:
  1. Reproduce the meaning
  2. Reproduce the register
  3. Respect sentence breaks and carriage returns
  4. Be consistent in the use of vocabulary and phrasing
  5. Maintain one-to-one correspondence between source and target
  6. Provide appropriate annotations.
All of which appears quite consistent with what most excellent translators strive to do, quite naturally…

Perhaps then that the notion of literal got carried away… like “the cow that jumped over the moon”. Perhaps that there is indeed miscommunication arising in the meanings of the term “literal” with one aspect of the term prevailing in the Courts and Public Administrations, and another in our profession and in linguistics (not to mention psychiatry...)

According to the OED, the term “literal” means: "Of a translation, version, or transcript: representing the very words of the original; verbally exact", which is exactly and precisely what the Courts and Public Administrations are seeking in translation. In other words, a translation akin to a hyper-realistic “visual representation” of the source that would be “exactly or faithfully copied” in the target language, stylistically “free of exaggeration, figures of speech or allusion… All of which intends to define the term “literal” as meaning “precise and exact”.

On the other hand, the OED also mentions that the term “literal” is etymologically derived from the Middle French term “letters” and by extension “literature… letters or the epistles”….  in this sense as opposed to “numerical”… And more importantly for our own purposes, the OED includes volition in the meaning of literal:Of a person, the mind, etc.: apt to take words literally; characterized by an inability to recognize metaphor or understand humorous exaggeration, irony, or the like; lacking imagination; prosaic, literal-minded”. In other words, this is the sense of the term “literal” as epitomized for example by Amelia Bedelia or Bécassine, two popular characters in children’s literature! And as it is often invoked in Smart Alec translation engines as source of errors, although the error in that particular case is that Alec is hardly person or mind….

In any event, there are many scholars who have examined the notion of literal meaning, and the importance of metaphor as a structuring principle of reality (e.g.; Ricoeur 1978, Lakoff 1987. Lakoff & Johnson, 2003), so there is much more to say about what it means to strip language “naked”, to its “original forms" or to reproduce it "faithfully".

 But for patent translation, and the “literal, word for word” injunctions coming from the Courts and Public Administrations, we are lucky to have an interpreter among us, who has clearly translated the Courts’ and Public Administrations’ “literal, word for word” translation requests into terms that translators can all agree upon, and strive to satisfy. 


Now liberated from the real pitfalls of understanding “literal” as the possibility of translating like Alec (the machine), Amelia Bedelia or Bécassine (the fictional characters), it is possible to start the difficult task of translating patents very literally, meaning precisely and exactly (i.e.; with no additions, subtractions or permutations, and without sacrificing meaning or the rules of proper English) according to Cross’ 6 rules of literal patent translation, and in compliance with the Courts’ and Public Administrations’ explicit (albeit succinct) requests!

Smile, Charlie Brown!  :-)

Amelia Bedelia
California Medical Board Licensing Program – Translation of foreign Academic Credentials
Cross, M. (2007) Literal translation of patents. The Patent Translator’s  Handbook. Alexandria, VA: ATA – American Translators Association, pp. 19-28.
Lakoff, G. (1987) Women, fire and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago, Ill: Chicago University Press.
Ricoeur, P. ( 1978) The metaphorical process as cognition, imagination and feeling, Critical Inquiry, Vol 5(1), 143-159.  
OED – Oxford English Dictionary – Article on Literal (adj. & noun). Online version. 

Tuesday, June 16, 2015

European Inventor Awards – The 2015 winners!

Copyright © Françoise Herrmann

So... who are the lucky winners who received one of the 3D stereolithographic and cast in bronze sail trophies, fabricated in France, on the occasion of the 10th 2015 EPO Inventor Awards competition?

The 2015 EPO Inventor award trophies were granted to the following winners:

In the Lifetime Achievement category – Andreas Manz (Switzerland) inventor of the microchip laboratory for point-of-service diagnostics and analysis (e.g.; portable diabetes monitor).

In the Industry category - Franz Amtmann (Austria) and Philippe Maugars (France) inventors of Near Field Communication (NFC), which secures data transfer between mobile devices.

In the Small and Medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) category, Laura Van 'T Veer, inventor of a gene-based breast cancer test called MammaPrint® that informs the best treatment options.

In the research category, Ludwik Leibler (France) – Inventor of Vitrimers (a new category of supramolecular polymers, with the capicity for infinite repair when heated, which means less waste (imagine scratches on the hood of a car which could be “cured”).

In the non-European Patent Organization country category: Sumio Iijima, Akira Koshio and Masako Yudasaka (Japan) – Inventors of the carbon nanotube (the strongest, lightest and most conductive material known)

And in the popular vote category, with 33% of the 47,000 votes cast, the prize was awarded to Ian Frazer (Australia) and Jian Zhout (China)– Inventors of the HPV (Human Papilloma Virus) vaccine.

Congratulations to everyone!


Now…nominations are being accepted for the 2016 EPO Inventor awards…. Here is the Entry form! And here is the link to the nomination FAQs.

You can participate too, and nominate your favorite (qualifying) inventor!

Andreas Manz
The Vitrimer : A french Team (CNRS-ESPCI ParisTech) discovers a revolutionary material

Saturday, June 13, 2015

European Inventor Awards – The 2015 Trophy

Copyright © Françoise Herrmann

Since the February kick-off for the 2015 EPO awards…you are probably wondering what the 2015 EPO awards trophy looks like! 

The EPO chose the sail both as a symbol that powers innovation (with or without an English pun…) and as the shape of the EPO Awards trophy. Additionally every year, the industrial process of manufacturing the sail trophy changes, highlighting one aspect or another of the hosting country, such as a particular patented industrial process and/or material.

This year, in Paris, is no exception. The mold of the trophy was manufactured using 3D stereolithography, a 3D printing process invented by Charles W. Hull [USA], winner of the 2014 European Patent Award in the non-European country category, and dubbed “the father of 3D printing”. The 2015 award displays very elaborate lattice-work, reminiscent of the Eiffel Tower in Paris, that can only be rendered with 3D printing. After the mold was fabricated using 3D printing, it was cast in bronze, and intended to be treasured as a work of art.  

So indeed, this year’s sail trophy is very special on more counts that one...
-  Gustave Eiffel, the eponymous engineer and architect of the Eiffel Tower, in 1889, was himself a successful inventor and entrepreneur, providing France with its most well known and enduring landmark, among many additional civil engineering works. 
- The 3D stereolithographic industrial process pioneered by Charles W. Hull, selected to manufacture the trophy's mold is largely understood as the process that will shape the next (fourth) industrial revolution (Anderson, 2014). 
- And finally, as the award is first printed as a mold, and then cast in bronze, with such elaborate lattice-work that can only be produced with 3D printing, this process is also very reminiscent of the steps invoked in the artistic process of bronze sculpting, and in particular the revolution in the object of sculptures brought about by the French sculptor Auguste Rodin, contemporary to Gustave Eiffel.

That’s quite a bit of wonderful synergy packed into this year’s 2015 EPO award sail trophy!

This story is featured in the short EPO video below..!

Anderson, C. (2014) Makers: The new Industrial Revolution. New York, NY: Crown Business books.
The European Inventor Award 2015 Trophy
INPI - La Tour Eiffel
13 things you never knew about the Eiffel Tower
Charles Hull
Herrmann, F (2015) Tonight, the OSCARS! In June, the EPO Awards! – Patents on the
soles of your shoes. February 22, 2015.
Auguste Rodin

Monday, June 8, 2015

More IP Office logos!

Copyright © Françoise Herrmann

Here are a few more Intellectual Property Office logos...  IP Australia, IP India, Germany, Irish Patents Office, New Zealand IPO, Norwegian Industrial Property Office, IP Philippines, Singapour and Spain!

Sunday, June 7, 2015

Intellectual Property Office Logos

Copyright © Françoise Herrmann

Here are a few IP Office Logos worldwide: EPO (Europe), USPTO (US), JPO (Japan),  KIPO (Korea), SIPO (China), WIPO (United Nations), OAPI (French-speaking Africa), CIPO (Canada), INPI (France), IMPI (Mexico), Benelux IP (Belgium, Luxemburg, Netherlands) and the UK IPO logo (old and wishful new)! [If your country is missing, send me your information, and I will gladly include your country's patent office logo!)

Saturday, June 6, 2015

2015 EPO Awards - The Jury

Copyright © Françoise Herrrmann

This year’s panel of 13 jurors shines with the inclusion of 6 women (4 more than usual), including in particular:
  • Anna Haupt, a young woman inventor, nominated as finalist in 2014 for the EPO Inventor Awards for an inflatable  bike helmet
  • Ingeborg Hochmair, also nominated as finalist in 2014 for the EPO Lifetime Achievement Award for the cochlear implant
  • Mandy Haberman, the well known British inventor of the Haberman® feeder and Anywayup® cup (also known as the ubiquitous “sippy cup”…), also nominated British Woman Inventor of the Year 2000
  • Christine Van Broeckhoven, winner of the 2011 EPO Inventor Award in the Research category for the identification of genes and proteins  with a role in neurodegenerative diseases of the brain (e.g.; Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, dementia, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis)
  • Clara Gaymar, CEO and President of GE France since 2006
  • Ayse Odman Boztosun, Member of the Faculty of Law of the University of Antalya, Turkey, Member of the EPO Economic and Scientific Advisory board (ESAB)
On the gentlemen’s side of the jury, two inventors -- of a very famous cube, and very famous shoe soles:
  •  Ernö Rubik and his eponymous and globally known invention “Rubik’s cube”.
  • Mario Moretti Polegato –Inventor of “holey shoes”, that is, the vapour-permeable soles of the GEOX® Amphibiox shoes
And a panel of eminent business executives, academics, and government-appointed officials.
  •  Tony Tangena, Senior Vice-President at Phillips, responsible for Phillips IP, and now President of epi, an organization representing 10,000 European patent attorneys
  • Tian Lipu, Commissioner of China’s patent office (SIPO), from 2005 to 2014
  • Wolfgang H. Hecki, Director General of the Deutsches Museums in Munich, Professor of experimental physics and nanotachnology at the Technical University of Munich, plus many more accolades.
  • Gerhard Cromme, Chairman of the Siemens A.G. Supervisory Board
  • Louis Schweitzer, Chair of the EPO Jury. Former, and current Honorary, President of Renault S.A. Investment Commissioner appointed by the President of France

The Jury has already deliberated…. Let the ceremony begin! 

Christine Van Broeckhoven
Many Haberman
EPO – Economic and Scientific Advisory Board (ESAB)
Herrmann F. (2013) Oh, patents! Rubik’s® cube
Herrmann F. (2013) Oh, patents! Geox amphibiox!  (1)– Patents on the soles of your shoes
Herrmann F. (2013) Oh, patents! Geox amphibiox!  (3)– Patents on the soles of your shoes
Herrmann, F. (2014) 2014 EPO Patent Award nominations! Inflatable bike helmet – Patents on the soles of your shoes
Herrmann, F. (2014) Oh, patents! Cochlear implants – Patents on the soles of your shoes
Karabel, S. (2015) Leadership à la française: How GE’s Clara Gaymard does it.