Moving Patent Applications Through the USPTO: Options for Applicants

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "Moving Patent Applications Through the USPTO: Options for Applicants"

Transcription

1 Moving Patent Applications Through the USPTO: Options for Applicants Navy T2 ORTA/Legal Workshop June 28, 2011 Kathleen Kahler Fonda Senior Legal Advisor, Office of Patent Legal Administration United States Patent and Trademark Office

2 Improving Applicant Resources New initiatives that help move applications through the patent prosecution system: Enhanced Examination Timing Control Three Track Green Tech pilot program Project Exchange 2

3 Current Acceleration Practices 3

4 Current Acceleration Practices Accelerated Examination Program Green Technology Program Project Exchange Petition to make special for age or health An overview of these programs is available at: omp_chart_dom_accel.pdf 4

5 Accelerated Examination Program 5

6 Accelerated Examination: Overview Goal is to complete examination of an application within 12 months from the filing date of the application. Applications are placed on an accelerated examination track throughout the entire prosecution in the USPTO. An applicant may have an application granted accelerated examination status under the Accelerated Examination Program provided certain requirements are met and a petition to make special under 37 CFR is filed. Requirements apply to all petitions to make special, except those related to: Age and Health Patent Prosecution Highway Green Technology Pilot Project Exchange 6

7 Accelerated Examination: Requirements Key requirements include the following: (1) the application must be filed via EFS-Web with a petition to make special (USPTO Form PTO/SB/28); (2) the required petition fee or a statement that the claimed invention is directed to environmental quality, development or conservation of energy resources, or counter terrorism; (3) the application must be complete and in condition for examination; (4) the application must contain three or fewer independent and twenty or fewer total claims, and must not contain any multiple dependent claims; (5) the claims must be directed to a single invention; (6) the petition must include a statement agreeing to have an interview; (7) applicant must provide a statement that a pre-examination search was conducted that meets certain requirements; and (8) applicant must provide a complete accelerated examination support document that satisfies certain requirements. See MPEP (a). 7

8 Accelerated-Examination Program: Statistics as of January 2011 Statistics on petitions: Granted Dismissed/Denied 1433 Pending 228 Average time to decide 1.93 months Statistics on First actions: Rejection 1497 (or 54.5%) Ex Parte Quayle 6 (or 0.2%) Allowance 1090 (or 39.7%) Average time from decision 1.69 months Statistics on final dispositions (per AE notice): Allowance 1560 Abandonment 100 Final Rejection 863 Average time to issue: 11.2 months from filing, 7.48 months from decision for patents issued in FY

9 Green Technology Pilot Program 9

10 Green Technology Pilot: Overview The Green Technology Pilot Program permits applicants to request accelerated treatment for applications pertaining to clean technologies, such as environmental quality, energy conservation, development of renewable energy resources, and greenhouse gas emission reductions. Applications will be placed on an accelerated examination track in the following situations: (1) prior to the first communication on merits, i.e., first Office action; (2) any appeal to the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences; and (3) the patent publication process. 10

11 Green Technology Pilot: Program Requirements Key requirements include the following: (1) the application must contain three or fewer independent claims and twenty or fewer total claims, and must not contain any multiple dependent claims; (2) the claims must be directed to a single invention that materially enhances the quality of the environment; or materially contributes to: (a) the discovery or development of renewable energy resources; (b) the more efficient utilization and conservation of energy resources; or (c) greenhouse gas emission reduction; (3) the petition to make special must state the basis for the special status (e.g., the invention materially enhances the quality of the environment by contributing to the restoration or maintenance of the basic lifesustaining natural elements); (4) the petition must include a statement explaining how the materiality standard is met if it is not clear on its face from the application disclosure; 11

12 Green Technology Pilot: Program Requirements (cont d) Key requirements (cont d): (5) the materiality standard does not permit an applicant to speculate as to how a hypothetical end-user might specially apply the invention in a manner that could materially enhance the quality of the environment; (6) the petition must be filed via EFS-Web; (7) the petition must be accompanied by a request for early publication (if not already published); and (8) the petition must be accompanied by the publication fee. 12

13 Green Technology Pilot: Program Requirements (cont d) The petition must be filed at least one day prior to the date that a first Office action (which may be an Office action containing only a restriction requirement) appears in the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. An initial classification requirement was removed on May 21, 2010, allowing more inventions related to green technologies to qualify. A filing date requirement was removed on November 10, Extended to December 31, 2011 or 3000 petitions have been granted, whichever is earlier. For more information: 13

14 Green Technology: Statistics as of May 30, 2011 Statistics on petitions: Granted Dismissed/Denied 1101/223 Pending 285 Average time to petition decision - 25 days Average time to first action after petition grant - 55 days Total patents 328 Average time to issue -20 months 14

15 Project Exchange 15

16 Project Exchange: Overview Applicant may have an application accorded special status for examination by expressly abandoning another unexamined application. Procedure allows applicants having multiple applications currently pending before the USPTO to have greater control over the priority with which their applications are examined. Reduces the backlog of unexamined patent applications pending before the USPTO. Applications will be placed on an accelerated track in the following situations: (1) prior to the first communication on merits, i.e., first Office action; (2) any appeal to the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences; and (3) the patent publication process. Scheduled to end: December 31, 2011 or 10,000 petitions have been granted, whichever occurs first. 16

17 Project Exchange: Requirements In order to receive accelerated treatment, applicants must file a petition to make special. Some of the key requirements include the following: (1) the non-provisional application for which accelerated status is sought must be filed before October 1, 2009; (2) the applicant has another co-pending non-provisional application that has an actual filing date earlier than October 1, 2009, and is complete; (3) the application for which accelerated status is sought and the other co-pending application either are owned by the same party as of October 1, 2009, or name at least one inventor in common; (4) the applicant files a letter of express abandonment in the copending application before it has been taken up for examination; 17

18 Key requirements (cont d) Project Exchange: Requirements (cont d) (5) applicant submits a statement that no application that claims the benefit of the expressly abandoned application has been filed or will be filed; (6) applicant submits a statement agreeing not to request a refund of any fees paid in the expressly abandoned application; (7) applicant submits a statement that no application that claims the same invention claimed in the expressly abandoned application has been filed or will be filed; and (8) applicant submits a statement certifying that petitions requesting special status under this program have not been filed in more than fourteen other applications. The small-entity status requirement was removed on June 24, 2010 to increase participation in the Program. For more information: 18

19 Project Exchange Statistics as of May 30, 2011 Statistics on petitions: Granted Denied 38 Pending 4 Average time to petition decision - 20 days Average time to first action after petition grant months Average time to issue - 8 months from petition grant 19

20 Petition to Make Special 20

21 Petition to make special (age or health): Overview Applications may be accorded accelerated examination status based on an applicant s age or health. Applications with granted petitions are placed on an accelerated examination track throughout the entire prosecution at the USPTO. Key requirements include a petition to make special with accompanying evidence showing: the state of health of the applicant is such that he or she might not be available to assist in the prosecution of the application if it were to run its normal course, such as a doctor's certificate or other medical certificate, or that the applicant is 65 years of age or older. 21

22 Petition to make special (age or health): FY 2010 Statistics Statistics on petitions (filed in FY 2010): Granted 2247 (745 granted electronically after filing electronically using USPTO format) Dismissed/Denied 59 Pending 161 Average time to petition decision: 67.8 days if non-electronic 45.9 days on average including electronic Total first actions in FY 2010 after a decision to grant status 1825 Average time to first action in FY 2010 after petition grant months Total patents in FY 2010 in which petition granted 1,029 Average time to issue for patents granted in FY 2010: months from filing months from petition grant 22

23 Enhanced Examination Timing Control 23

24 Enhanced Examination Timing Control Three-track Track I go fast Track II default, current process Track III go slow 24

25 3-Track Examination: Current Goals Provide framework to give applicants more control on timing of examination; Promote, but not mandate, work sharing with other Offices; Eliminate or reduce work that applicants currently do not want the USPTO to perform; and Promote, but not mandate, requests for search reports. 25

26 3-Track Examination: Major Benefits Promotes expedited patenting and commercial exploitation of the most promising technologies for applicants. Increases efficiency where the USPTO is the Office of Second Filing (OSF) and applicants opt to delay examination while awaiting the search and/or examination results of the Office of First Filing (OFF). Allows USPTO to focus examination resources and efforts on applications that are more important to applicants. Allows applicants to prioritize applications for examination. 26

27 3-Track Examination: Summary Any applicant may (but will not be required to) request: Track I: Prioritized examination for a fee OR Track III: A delay of up to 30-months after the earliest claimed priority date (PCT-like) Track II (the default track): Applicants who do not select Track I or Track III 27

28 Enhanced Examination Timing Control: Public Meeting and Comments Publication of request for comments and notice of July 20, 2010 public meeting: June 4, 2010 (75 FR 31763). Comment period closed August 20, 2010; 53 comments received Notice of Proposed Rule Making for Track I published February 4, 2011 (76 FR 6369) Final rule published April 4, 2011 (76 FR 18399); effective date delayed until further notice April 29, 2011 (76 FR 23876) 28

29 Prioritized Examination: Track I Implementation USPTO proposed to implement Track I separately from Track III to move forward with Track I as quickly as possible. Ability to request a delay in docketing of an application for examination and payment of certain fees (Track III) is still under consideration. USPTO proposed to limit the annual number of Track I applications to 10,000 for the first year and revisit the annual cap at the end of the year. 29

30 Prioritized Examination: Track I Basics Track I provides options for innovators to receive an early indication of patentability and, if appropriate, a patent much faster than traditional timelines. The aggregate goal for handling Track I applications would be to provide a final disposition within 12 months of prioritized status being granted. Other existing prioritization programs and pilots will not be changed by implementation of Track I. 30

31 Prioritized Examination: Track I Goal The final disposition for the 12-month goal includes occurrence of any of the following: Mailing of a notice of allowance Mailing of a final Office action Filing of a notice of appeal Declaration of an interference by the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences Filing of a request for continued examination (RCE) Abandonment of the application 31

32 Prioritized Examination: Track I Fee The prioritized examination fee has been set at $4000 in order to recover the full cost of the resources necessary to increase the work output of the USPTO, so that non-prioritized applications will not be delayed due to diversion of resources for processing and examination of the prioritized applications. Current fee setting authority does not permit USPTO to discount for small entity applicants. 32

33 Prioritized Examination: Track I Requirements A request for prioritized examination requires the following: Application must be an original utility or plant nonprovisional application filed under 35 USC 111(a) via EFS-Web; Application must be complete under 37 CFR 1.51(b), with any fees due under 37 CFR 1.16 paid on filing; The request for prioritized examination must be present on filing and be accompanied by the prioritized examination fee, a processing fee, and the publication fee; and Application must contain no more than 4 independent claims and 30 total claims and no multiple dependent claims. 33

34 Prioritized Examination: Track I Time Periods The time periods set in Office actions for applications in Track I is the same as set forth in MPEP (b). If, however, applicant files a request under 37 CFR 1.136(a) for an extension of time to file a reply, prioritized examination of the application will be terminated. 34

35 Track III Track III: Basics Applicant can request a delay in docketing the application for examination by filing a request for delay in payment of the examination fee and the surcharge for a maximum period not to exceed thirty months. Allows applicants to make informed decisions about whether to prosecute an application. 35

36 Track III Basics PCT timing requested Allows applicants to make informed decisions about whether to prosecute an application (e.g., what claims to pursue, locate investors to fund the innovation). All applications in this Track must be published at 18 months. Upon expiration of the 30-month period from the earliest relied upon filing date, applicants must (1) affirmatively request examination (similar to an international application), and (2) pay any of the fees that were deferred. Thereafter the application is treated as a Track II application, but for purposes of queuing to the examiner as one that was filed when examination was requested. 36

37 Track II Track II: Basics Prioritization or PCT timing does not need to be requested. Track II is the default track. The pendency of Track II will be used for planning and reporting. 37

38 Questions? By phone: Office of Patent Legal Administration help line By Thank you! 38

39 FY 2010 Statistics 39

40 FY 2010 Highlights Filings up 4% over projection Production Examiner Production Goals - 104% Granted over 233,000 patents Total allowances over 240,000 27,000 cases worked off the backlog during the fourth quarter 40

41 FY 2010 Highlights - continued Quality Final Disposition Compliance Rate 96.3% In-process Compliance Rate 94.9% Affirmed and Affirmed-in-part represents 63% of the total Board dispositions 41

42 Backlog Cases 42

43 First Action Pendency and Total Pendency FY 2009 FY Total Pendency Target (34.8 Months) 2010 First Action Pendency Target (25.4 Months) 43

44 Average Allowance Rate FY 2009 FY 2010 (biweekly average) 44

45 Quality Measures Percent FY 2005 FY 2010 (rolling 12-month average) Target % Target % 09/05 03/06 09/06 03/07 09/07 03/08 09/08 03/09 09/09 02/10 04/10 06/10 08/10 Allowance/Final Compliance Rate Non-Final In-Process Compliance Rate 45

46 Current (UPR) Utility Plant Reissue Backlog Backlog Tail 46

47 Patents Dashboard 47

USPTO PATENT EXAMINATION ACCELERATION PROGRAMS AND PROPOSALS

USPTO PATENT EXAMINATION ACCELERATION PROGRAMS AND PROPOSALS USPTO PATENT EXAMINATION ACCELERATION PROGRAMS AND PROPOSALS Name Description of Effective Accelerated Pursuant to the Accelerated, an applicant may have an application granted examination status provided

More information

United States Patent and Trademark Office and Japan Patent Office Collaborative Search. AGENCY: United States Patent and Trademark Office, Commerce.

United States Patent and Trademark Office and Japan Patent Office Collaborative Search. AGENCY: United States Patent and Trademark Office, Commerce. This document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on 07/10/2015 and available online at http://federalregister.gov/a/2015-16846, and on FDsys.gov [3510 16 P] DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE United

More information

Prioritized Examination and New Prior Art defined for First-Inventor-to-File

Prioritized Examination and New Prior Art defined for First-Inventor-to-File Prioritized Examination and New Prior Art defined for First-Inventor-to-File SIPO-US IP Council Conference New York June 3, 2013 Denise Kettelberger PhD, JD Nielsen IP Law, LLC USPTO Concerns Increasing

More information

Fast Track. Strategies at the USPTO. Hillsborough County Bar Association. January 5, Anton Hopen. Smith & Hopen, PA

Fast Track. Strategies at the USPTO. Hillsborough County Bar Association. January 5, Anton Hopen. Smith & Hopen, PA Fast Track Strategies at the USPTO Hillsborough County Bar Association January 5, 2012 Anton Hopen Smith & Hopen, PA Accelerating Trademark Applications Post-Registration Timeline* Mark Registers 8 declaration

More information

USPTO Programs for Expediting Patent Prosecution: Accelerated Exam, Patent Prosecution Highway, Green Technology. Susan Perng Pan November 2010

USPTO Programs for Expediting Patent Prosecution: Accelerated Exam, Patent Prosecution Highway, Green Technology. Susan Perng Pan November 2010 USPTO Programs for Expediting Patent Prosecution: Accelerated Exam, Patent Prosecution Highway, Green Technology Susan Perng Pan November 2010 Accelerated Examination Available in non-reissue non-provisional

More information

Strategies for Expediting U.S. Patent Prosecution. Rachel K. Pilloff

Strategies for Expediting U.S. Patent Prosecution. Rachel K. Pilloff Strategies for Expediting U.S. Patent Prosecution Rachel K. Pilloff Strategies for Expediting U.S. Prosecution 1. Petition to Make Special 2. Track One Prioritized Examination 3. Request for Accelerated

More information

PATENT PROSECUTION STRATEGIES IN AN AIA WORLD: SUCCEEDING WITH THE CHANGES

PATENT PROSECUTION STRATEGIES IN AN AIA WORLD: SUCCEEDING WITH THE CHANGES PATENT PROSECUTION STRATEGIES IN AN AIA WORLD: SUCCEEDING WITH THE CHANGES BY: Juan Carlos A. Marquez Stites & Harbison PLLC 1 OVERVIEW I. Summary Overview of AIA Provisions II. Portfolio Building Side

More information

Accelerating the Acquisition of an Enforceable Patent: Bypassing the USPTO s Backlog Lawrence A. Stahl and Seth E. Boeshore

Accelerating the Acquisition of an Enforceable Patent: Bypassing the USPTO s Backlog Lawrence A. Stahl and Seth E. Boeshore Accelerating the Acquisition of an Enforceable Patent: Bypassing the USPTO s Backlog Lawrence A. Stahl and Seth E. Boeshore The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) dockets new patent applications

More information

K&L Gates Webinar Current Developments in Patents. Peggy Focarino Commissioner for Patents September 13 th, 2012

K&L Gates Webinar Current Developments in Patents. Peggy Focarino Commissioner for Patents September 13 th, 2012 K&L Gates Webinar Current Developments in Patents Peggy Focarino Commissioner for Patents September 13 th, 2012 IP Jobs Report IP intensive industries accounted for about $5.06 trillion in value added,

More information

Understanding Patent Examiner Docketing & Workflow to Expedite Prosecution

Understanding Patent Examiner Docketing & Workflow to Expedite Prosecution Understanding Patent Examiner Docketing & Workflow to Expedite Prosecution John Pani and John Freeman October 25, 2016 USPTO Docketing and Workflow Technology 2 Overview of Docketing/Workflow Technology

More information

Changes at the PTO. October 21, 2011 Claremont Hotel. Steven C. Carlson Fish & Richardson P.C. Bradley Baugh North Weber & Baugh LLP

Changes at the PTO. October 21, 2011 Claremont Hotel. Steven C. Carlson Fish & Richardson P.C. Bradley Baugh North Weber & Baugh LLP Changes at the PTO October 21, 2011 Claremont Hotel Steven C. Carlson Fish & Richardson P.C. Bradley Baugh North Weber & Baugh LLP Overview: Changes at the PTO Some Causes for Reform Patent Trial and Appeals

More information

AGENCY: United States Patent and Trademark Office, Commerce. SUMMARY: The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has modified

AGENCY: United States Patent and Trademark Office, Commerce. SUMMARY: The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has modified This document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on 05/17/2013 and available online at http://federalregister.gov/a/2013-11870, and on FDsys.gov [3510-16-P] DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE United

More information

Get Your Design Patent Fast!

Get Your Design Patent Fast! 1 Get Your Design Patent Fast! Accelerated Examination And Expedited Examination Robert M. Spear Design Patent Specialist, TC2900 USPTO 2 Fast Patents! Accelerated examination applications are special

More information

Introduction. 1 These materials are public information and have been prepared solely for educational and entertainment purposes to contribute

Introduction. 1 These materials are public information and have been prepared solely for educational and entertainment purposes to contribute Introduction Patent Prosecution Under The AIA William R. Childs, Ph.D., J.D. Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP 1500 K Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20005-1209 (202) 230-5140 phone (202) 842-8465 fax William.Childs@dbr.com

More information

Delain Law Office, PLLC

Delain Law Office, PLLC Delain Law Office, PLLC Patent Prosecution and Appeal Tips From PTO Day, December 5, 2005 Nancy Baum Delain, Esq. Registered Patent Attorney Delain Law Office, PLLC Clifton Park, NY http://www.ipattorneyfirm.com

More information

Accelerated Examination. Presented by Hans Troesch, Principal Fish & Richardson P.C. March 2, 2010

Accelerated Examination. Presented by Hans Troesch, Principal Fish & Richardson P.C. March 2, 2010 Accelerated Examination Presented by Hans Troesch, Principal Fish & Richardson P.C. March 2, 2010 Overview The Basics Petition for accelerated examination Pre-examination search Examination Support Document

More information

Changes To Implement the First Inventor To File Provisions of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act Final Rules

Changes To Implement the First Inventor To File Provisions of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act Final Rules Changes To Implement the First Inventor To File Provisions of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act Final Rules FOR: NEIFELD IP LAW, PC, ALEXANDRIA VA Date: 2-19-2013 RICHARD NEIFELD NEIFELD IP LAW, PC http://www.neifeld.com

More information

First Inventor to File: Proposed Rules and Proposed Examination Guidelines

First Inventor to File: Proposed Rules and Proposed Examination Guidelines First Inventor to File: Proposed Rules and Proposed Examination Guidelines The Federal Laboratory Consortium for Technology Transfer America Invents Act Webinar Series October 1, 2012 Kathleen Kahler Fonda

More information

August 31, I. Introduction

August 31, I. Introduction CHANGES TO U.S. PATENT PRACTICE FOR LIMITATIONS ON CLAIMS, CLAIM FEES, RELATED APPLICATIONS AND APPLICATIONS CONTAINING PATENTABLY INDISTINCT CLAIMS, CONTINUING APPLICATIONS, AND REQUESTS FOR CONTINUED

More information

Normal Examination Speed (2/2)

Normal Examination Speed (2/2) Expediting Examination of Patent Applications Through USPTO Programs Peter Trahms Neudorfer KCBA, IP Section February 2, 2012 1 Normal Examination Speed (1/2) First action pendency: 23.6 months Total pendency:

More information

USPTO Implementation of the America Invents Act. Janet Gongola Patent Reform Coordinator Direct dial:

USPTO Implementation of the America Invents Act. Janet Gongola Patent Reform Coordinator Direct dial: USPTO Implementation of the America Invents Act Janet Gongola Patent Reform Coordinator Janet.Gongola@uspto.gov Direct dial: 571-272-8734 Three Pillars of the AIA 11/30/2011 2 Speed Prioritized examination

More information

John Doll Commissioner for Patents. February 1, 2006

John Doll Commissioner for Patents. February 1, 2006 John Doll Commissioner for Patents February 1, 2006 USPTO Request for Public Input: Strategic Planning Agency developing new strategic plan Part of budget process Planning for at least six-year period

More information

New Patent Application Rules Set to Take Effect November 1, 2007

New Patent Application Rules Set to Take Effect November 1, 2007 INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY October 2007 New Patent Application Rules Set to Take Effect November 1, 2007 The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has issued new rules for the patent application

More information

Annex 2 DEFINITIONS FOR TERMS AND FOR STATISTICS ON PROCEDURES

Annex 2 DEFINITIONS FOR TERMS AND FOR STATISTICS ON PROCEDURES DEFINITIONS FOR TERMS AND FOR STATISTICS ON PROCEDURES This annex contains firstly definitions of the main terms used in the report 51. After that there is an explanation of the patent procedures relating

More information

Policies of USPTO Director Kappos & U.S. Patent Law Reform

Policies of USPTO Director Kappos & U.S. Patent Law Reform Policies of USPTO Director Kappos & U.S. Patent Law Reform December 15, 2011 Speaker: Ron Harris The Harris Firm ron@harrispatents.com The USPTO Under Director David Kappos USPTO Director David Kappos

More information

Practice Tips for Foreign Applicants

Practice Tips for Foreign Applicants Practice Tips for Foreign Applicants Mark Powell Deputy Commissioner for International Patent Cooperation Overview Changes in Practice America Invents Act (AIA) Patent Law Treaty (PLT) & Patent Law Treaties

More information

PATENT PROSECUTION HIGHWAY

PATENT PROSECUTION HIGHWAY PATENT PROSECUTION HIGHWAY William Chung Scully, Scott, Murphy & Presser, PC 400 Garden City Plaza, Suite 300 Garden City, NY 11530 516-742-4343 intprop@ssmp.com Overview of Requirements for PPH 2.0 (1)

More information

SEC. 11. FEES FOR PATENT SERVICES.

SEC. 11. FEES FOR PATENT SERVICES. SEC. 11. FEES FOR PATENT SERVICES. (a) General Patent Services- Subsections (a) and (b) of section 41 of title 35, United States Code, are amended to read as follows: `(a) General Fees- The Director shall

More information

Changes to Implement the First Inventor to File Provisions of the Leahy-Smith. AGENCY: United States Patent and Trademark Office, Commerce.

Changes to Implement the First Inventor to File Provisions of the Leahy-Smith. AGENCY: United States Patent and Trademark Office, Commerce. This document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on 07/23/2012 and available online at http://federalregister.gov/a/2012-17915, and on FDsys.gov [3510-16-P] DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE United

More information

After Final Practice and Appeal

After Final Practice and Appeal July 15, 2016 Steven M. Jensen, Member Why is a Final Rejection Important? Substantive prosecution is closed Filing a response to a Final Office Action does not stop the time for responding Application

More information

FINAL RULES IMPLEMENTING EIGHTEEN MONTH PUBLICATION OF PATENT APPLICATIONS

FINAL RULES IMPLEMENTING EIGHTEEN MONTH PUBLICATION OF PATENT APPLICATIONS FINAL RULES IMPLEMENTING EIGHTEEN MONTH PUBLICATION OF PATENT APPLICATIONS November 3, 2000 As discussed in our November 29, 1999, Special Report on the Omnibus Reform Act of 1999, legislation was enacted

More information

Information Disclosure Statements 2017 BIRCH, STEWART, KOLASCH & BIRCH, LLP

Information Disclosure Statements 2017 BIRCH, STEWART, KOLASCH & BIRCH, LLP Information Disclosure Statements THE BASICS What is an IDS? An IDS is a paper submitted to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office by an Applicant providing a list of documents having potential relevance

More information

PATENTS TRADEMARKS COPYRIGHTS TRADE SECRETS ZIOLKOWSKI PATENT SOLUTIONS GROUP, SC INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ATTORNEYS. Patent Process FAQs

PATENTS TRADEMARKS COPYRIGHTS TRADE SECRETS ZIOLKOWSKI PATENT SOLUTIONS GROUP, SC INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ATTORNEYS. Patent Process FAQs PATENTS TRADEMARKS COPYRIGHTS TRADE SECRETS ZIOLKOWSKI PATENT SOLUTIONS GROUP, SC INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ATTORNEYS Patent Process FAQs The Patent Process The patent process can be challenging for those

More information

PATENT COOPERATION TREATY (PCT): BENEFITS AND STRATEGIES FOR APPLICANTS. Seminar on WIPO Services and Initiatives Gary L. Montle Nashville, TN

PATENT COOPERATION TREATY (PCT): BENEFITS AND STRATEGIES FOR APPLICANTS. Seminar on WIPO Services and Initiatives Gary L. Montle Nashville, TN PATENT COOPERATION TREATY (PCT): BENEFITS AND STRATEGIES FOR APPLICANTS Seminar on WIPO Services and Initiatives Gary L. Montle Nashville, TN April 13, 2016 Topics for Discussion General considerations

More information

PATENT ACTIVITY AT THE IP5 OFFICES

PATENT ACTIVITY AT THE IP5 OFFICES Chapter 4 PATENT ACTIVITY AT THE IP5 OFFICES This chapter presents trends in patent application filings and grants at the IP5 Offices only. While in Chapter 3 the latest data were for 2015, most of the

More information

IP CONCLAVE 2010, MUMBAI STRATEGIES WITH US PATENT PRACTICE NAREN THAPPETA US PATENT ATTORNEY & INDIA PATENT AGENT BANGALORE, INDIA

IP CONCLAVE 2010, MUMBAI STRATEGIES WITH US PATENT PRACTICE NAREN THAPPETA US PATENT ATTORNEY & INDIA PATENT AGENT BANGALORE, INDIA IP CONCLAVE 2010, MUMBAI STRATEGIES WITH US PATENT PRACTICE NAREN THAPPETA US PATENT ATTORNEY & INDIA PATENT AGENT BANGALORE, INDIA www.iphorizons.com Not legal Advise! Broad Organization A. Pre filing

More information

Navigating the Patent Prosecution Highway and Other Accelerated Filing Options

Navigating the Patent Prosecution Highway and Other Accelerated Filing Options Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Navigating the Patent Prosecution Highway and Other Accelerated Filing Options Evaluating the Different Options, Weighing the Benefits and Risks,

More information

Re: JIPA Comments on the Proposed Enhanced Examination Timing Control Initiative in the United States

Re: JIPA Comments on the Proposed Enhanced Examination Timing Control Initiative in the United States JAPAN INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ASSOCIATION Asahi-Seimei Otemachi Bldg. 18F. Tel: 81 3 5205 3433 6-1, Otemachi 2-Chome Fax:81 3 5205 3391 Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 100-0004 JAPAN August 20, 2010 Hon. David J. Kappos

More information

Presented to The Ohio State Bar Association. May 23, 2012

Presented to The Ohio State Bar Association. May 23, 2012 Your Guide to the America Invents Act (AIA) Presented to The Ohio State Bar Association May 23, 2012 Overview A. Most comprehensive change to U.S. patent law in over 60 years; signed into law Sept. 16,

More information

WHAT TO EXPECT WHEN YOU RE EXPECTING A PATENT By R. Devin Ricci 1

WHAT TO EXPECT WHEN YOU RE EXPECTING A PATENT By R. Devin Ricci 1 WHAT TO EXPECT WHEN YOU RE EXPECTING A PATENT By R. Devin Ricci 1 The general outlay of this guide is to present some of the who, what, where, when, and why of the patent system in order to be able to

More information

STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS IN COORDINATING ACCELERATION OF INTERNATIONAL PATENT PROSECUTION

STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS IN COORDINATING ACCELERATION OF INTERNATIONAL PATENT PROSECUTION STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS IN COORDINATING ACCELERATION OF INTERNATIONAL PATENT PROSECUTION Kathryn H. Wade, Ph.D. 1, Hazim Ansari 2, and John K. McDonald, Ph.D 1. 1 Kilpatrick Stockton LLP, 1100 Peachtree

More information

Chapter 1900 Protest Protest Under 37 CFR [R ] How Protest Is Submitted

Chapter 1900 Protest Protest Under 37 CFR [R ] How Protest Is Submitted Chapter 1900 Protest 1901 Protest Under 37 CFR 1.291 1901.01 Who Can Protest 1901.02 Information Which Can Be Relied on in Protest 1901.03 How Protest Is Submitted 1901.04 When Should the Protest Be Submitted

More information

United States Patent and Trademark Office Registration Examination for Patent Attorneys and Agents April 18, Morning Session Model Answers

United States Patent and Trademark Office Registration Examination for Patent Attorneys and Agents April 18, Morning Session Model Answers United States Patent and Trademark Office Registration Examination for Patent Attorneys and Agents April 18, 2001 1. ANSWER: (A) is the most correct answer because there is compliance with 37 C.F.R. 1.195.

More information

2001 through 2017 IPLEGALED, Inc. All Rights Reserved

2001 through 2017 IPLEGALED, Inc. All Rights Reserved CHAPTER 2 FREQUENTLY USED DOCUMENTS AND CONCEPTS There are a number of documents and concepts peculiar to patent practice that you will use frequently in your professional practice. They are essentially

More information

Chapter 2500 Maintenance Fees

Chapter 2500 Maintenance Fees Chapter 2500 Maintenance Fees 2501 2504 2506 2510 2515 2520 2522 2530 2531 2532 2540 2542 2550 2560 2570 2575 2580 2590 2591 2595 Introduction Patents Subject to Maintenance Fees Times for Submitting Maintenance

More information

Priority Claims, Incorporation By Reference, and how to fix errors, big and small. March 9, Jack G. Abid. Orlando, Florida

Priority Claims, Incorporation By Reference, and how to fix errors, big and small. March 9, Jack G. Abid. Orlando, Florida Priority Claims, Incorporation By Reference, and how to fix errors, big and small. March 9, 2016 Jack G. Abid Orlando, Florida Roadmap I. Introduction A. What? B. Why C. Yes, People Screw This Up II. Priority

More information

PATENT ACTIVITY AT THE IP5 OFFICES

PATENT ACTIVITY AT THE IP5 OFFICES Chapter 4 IP5 Statistics Report 2015 PATENT ACTIVITY AT THE IP5 OFFICES This chapter presents trends in patent application filings and grants at the IP5 Offices only. While in Chapter 3 the latest data

More information

Newly Signed U.S. Patent Law Will Overhaul Patent Procurement, Enforcement and Defense

Newly Signed U.S. Patent Law Will Overhaul Patent Procurement, Enforcement and Defense September 16, 2011 Practice Groups: IP Procurement and Portfolio Management Intellectual Property Litigation Newly Signed U.S. Patent Law Will Overhaul Patent Procurement, Enforcement and Defense On September

More information

Patent Term Patent Term Extension Patent Term Adjustment

Patent Term Patent Term Extension Patent Term Adjustment Patent Term Patent Term Extension Patent Term Adjustment PATENT TERM Patent Term (Utility & Plant) June 8, 1978 June 8, 1995 1 2 3 Patent Term (Utility & Plant) 1 June 8, 1978 June 8, 1995 Zone 1 Issued

More information

USPTO Final Rule Changes for Continuations and Claims. John B. Pegram Ronald C. Lundquist August 30, 2007

USPTO Final Rule Changes for Continuations and Claims. John B. Pegram Ronald C. Lundquist August 30, 2007 USPTO Final Rule Changes for Continuations and Claims John B. Pegram Ronald C. Lundquist August 30, 2007 Our Backgrounds Ron: Patent prosecution, opinions, due diligence and client counseling Emphasis

More information

Patent Rule Changes to Support Implementation of the United States Patent and Trademark Office 21 st Century Strategic Plan

Patent Rule Changes to Support Implementation of the United States Patent and Trademark Office 21 st Century Strategic Plan Patent Rule Changes to Support Implementation of the United States Patent and Trademark Office 21 st Century Strategic Plan October 7, 2004 The United States Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) has established

More information

GLOSSARY of patent related terms in the FOUR OFFICE STATISTICS REPORT 2010 EDITION

GLOSSARY of patent related terms in the FOUR OFFICE STATISTICS REPORT 2010 EDITION GLOSSARY of patent related terms in the FOUR OFFICE STATISTICS RRT 2010 EDITION Disclaimer: The explanations in this glossary are given in order to help readers of the Four Office Statistics Report in

More information

Tips On Maximizing Patent Term Adjustment

Tips On Maximizing Patent Term Adjustment Portfolio Media. Inc. 860 Broadway, 6th Floor New York, NY 10003 www.law360.com Phone: +1 646 783 7100 Fax: +1 646 783 7161 customerservice@law360.com Tips On Maximizing Patent Term Adjustment Law360,

More information

SEC PROVISIONS TO IMPLEMENT THE PATENT LAW TREATY

SEC PROVISIONS TO IMPLEMENT THE PATENT LAW TREATY Review of United States Statutory Implementation of the Patent Law Treaty By Richard Neifeld, Neifeld IP Law, PC 1 I. INTRODUCTION The "Patent Law Treaty " (PLT) is an international treaty administered

More information

CHANGES TO IMPLEMENT THE INVENTOR S OATH OR DECLARATION PROVISIONS OF

CHANGES TO IMPLEMENT THE INVENTOR S OATH OR DECLARATION PROVISIONS OF CHANGES TO IMPLEMENT THE INVENTOR S OATH OR DECLARATION PROVISIONS OF THE LEAHY-SMITH AMERICA INVENTS ACT (AIA); FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS 1 EFFECTIVE DATE Q.1.1: What is the effective date for the inventor

More information

Benefits and Dangers of U.S. Provisional Applications

Benefits and Dangers of U.S. Provisional Applications Benefits and Dangers of U.S. Provisional Applications 2012 IP Summer Seminar Kathryn A. Piffat, Ph.D. Senior Associate, Intellectual Property kpiffat@edwardswildman.com July 2012 2012 Edwards Wildman Palmer

More information

Patent Prosecution Update

Patent Prosecution Update Patent Prosecution Update March 2012 Contentious Proceedings at the USPTO Under the America Invents Act by Rebecca M. McNeill The America Invents Act of 2011 (AIA) makes significant changes to contentious

More information

PATENT ACTIVITY AT THE IP5 OFFICES

PATENT ACTIVITY AT THE IP5 OFFICES Chapter 4 PATENT ACTIVITY AT THE IP5 OFFICES This chapter presents trends in patent application filings and grants at the IP5 Offices only. While in Chapter 3 the latest data were for 2012, most of the

More information

Patent Prosecution Under The AIA

Patent Prosecution Under The AIA Patent Prosecution Under The AIA A Practical Guide For Prosecutors William R. Childs, Ph.D., J.D. August 22, 2013 DISCLAIMER These materials are public information and have been prepared solely for educational

More information

By Howard L. Hoffenberg The IP and Business Law Offices of Howard L. Hoffenberg, Esq.

By Howard L. Hoffenberg The IP and Business Law Offices of Howard L. Hoffenberg, Esq. Guide on Responding to an Office Action in a Patent Case By Howard L. Hoffenberg The IP and Business Law Offices of Howard L. Hoffenberg, Esq. First written for use in John Park and Assoc. agent s class

More information

AUSTRALIA - Standard Patents - Schedule of Charges

AUSTRALIA - Standard Patents - Schedule of Charges AUSTRALIA - Standard Patents - Schedule of Charges Effective 1 January 2018 Applications 1 Filing non-convention Standard application (filed electronically) 370.00 630.00 1000.00 2 Filing PCT AU National

More information

Chapter 1400 Correction of Patents

Chapter 1400 Correction of Patents Chapter 1400 Correction of Patents 1400.01 Introduction 1401 Reissue 1402 Grounds for Filing 1403 Diligence in Filing 1404 Submission of Papers Where Reissue Patent Is in Litigation 1405 Reissue and Patent

More information

Rule 130 Declarations for First-Inventor-to-File Applications

Rule 130 Declarations for First-Inventor-to-File Applications 10/18/2016 1 Rule 130 Declarations for First-Inventor-to-File Applications Biotech/Chem/Pharma Customer Partnership Meeting October 19, 2016 Kathleen Kahler Fonda Senior Legal Advisor Office of Patent

More information

Chapter 1800 Patent Cooperation Treaty

Chapter 1800 Patent Cooperation Treaty Chapter 1800 Patent Cooperation Treaty 1801 Basic Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) Principles 1802 PCT Definitions 1803 Reservations Under the PCT Taken by the United States of America 1805 Where to File

More information

The Serious Burden Requirement Has Teeth - A Prohibition on Restriction Requirements Later in Prosecution

The Serious Burden Requirement Has Teeth - A Prohibition on Restriction Requirements Later in Prosecution The Serious Burden Requirement Has Teeth - A Prohibition on Restriction Requirements Later in Prosecution By Rick Neifeld, Neifeld IP Law, PC 1 Rick Neifeld is the senior partner at Neifeld IP Law, PC,

More information

IPDAS Forms Library: A Complete List

IPDAS Forms Library: A Complete List IPDAS Forms Library: A Complete List A Complete Library of Practice-Specific Documents. The IPDAS forms library contains more than 450 templates for use in: USPTO and international filings (PCT, Hague,

More information

Prosecuting an Israel Patent Application and Beyond

Prosecuting an Israel Patent Application and Beyond page 1 of 11 Prosecuting an Israel Patent Application and Beyond Updated July 2017 LIST OF CONTENTS 1. General Information (page 2) a. Language b. Conventions c. Obtaining a filing date and number d. Excess

More information

America Invents Act H.R (Became Law: September 16, 2011) Michael K. Mutter Birch, Stewart, Kolasch & Birch October 11-12, 2011

America Invents Act H.R (Became Law: September 16, 2011) Michael K. Mutter Birch, Stewart, Kolasch & Birch   October 11-12, 2011 America Invents Act H.R. 1249 (Became Law: September 16, 2011) Michael K. Mutter Birch, Stewart, Kolasch & Birch www.bskb.com October 11-12, 2011 H.R. 1249 became law Sept. 16, 2011 - Overview first inventor

More information

UNDERSTANDING THE BACKLOG PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH REQUESTS FOR CONTINUED EXAMINATION PRACTICE

UNDERSTANDING THE BACKLOG PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH REQUESTS FOR CONTINUED EXAMINATION PRACTICE UNDERSTANDING THE BACKLOG PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH REQUESTS FOR CONTINUED EXAMINATION PRACTICE SEAN TU ABSTRACT One of the greatest problems facing the current patent administration is a long patent pendency

More information

Change in Procedure Relating to an Application Filing Date

Change in Procedure Relating to an Application Filing Date Department of Commerce Patent and Trademark Office [Docket No. 951019254-6136-02] RIN 0651-XX05 Change in Procedure Relating to an Application Filing Date Agency: Patent and Trademark Office, Commerce.

More information

Improving the Accuracy of the Trademark Register: Request for Comments on Possible

Improving the Accuracy of the Trademark Register: Request for Comments on Possible This document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on 05/16/2017 and available online at https://federalregister.gov/d/2017-09856, and on FDsys.gov DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE United States

More information

One Hundred Twelfth Congress of the United States of America

One Hundred Twelfth Congress of the United States of America S. 3486 One Hundred Twelfth Congress of the United States of America AT THE SECOND SESSION Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday, the third day of January, two thousand and twelve An Act

More information

Patents. What is a Patent? 11/16/2017. The Decision Between Patent and Trade Secret Protection

Patents. What is a Patent? 11/16/2017. The Decision Between Patent and Trade Secret Protection The Decision Between Patent and Trade Secret Protection November 2017 John J. O Malley Ryan W. O Donnell vklaw.com 1 Patents vklaw.com 2 What is a Patent? A right to exclude others from making, using,

More information

Overview of the Patenting Process

Overview of the Patenting Process Overview of the Patenting Process WILLIAMS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY 9200 W Cross Dr Ste 202 Littleton, CO 80123 o. (720) 328-5343 f. (720) 328-5297 www.wip.net info@wip.net What is a Patent? A patent is an

More information

PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE 1 (REVISION 15) ASSIGNMENT OF JUDGES TO PANELS

PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE 1 (REVISION 15) ASSIGNMENT OF JUDGES TO PANELS PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE 1 (REVISION 15) ASSIGNMENT OF JUDGES TO PANELS This Standard Operating Procedure ( SOP ) describes the process by which judges are assigned to

More information

GLOSSARY of patent related terms in the IP5 STATISTICS REPORT 2015 EDITION

GLOSSARY of patent related terms in the IP5 STATISTICS REPORT 2015 EDITION GLOSSARY of patent related terms in the IP5 STATISTICS RRT 2015 EDITION Disclaimer: The explanations in this glossary are given in order to help readers of the IP5 Statistics Report understand the patent

More information

PROCEDURES FOR INVALIDATING, CLARIFYING OR NARROWING A PATENT IN THE PATENT OFFICE UNDER THE AMERICA INVENTS ACT (AIA)

PROCEDURES FOR INVALIDATING, CLARIFYING OR NARROWING A PATENT IN THE PATENT OFFICE UNDER THE AMERICA INVENTS ACT (AIA) I. Prior to AIA, there were two primary ways for a third party to invalidate a patent in the patent office: A. Interference under 35 U.S.C. 135 & 37 C.F.R. 41.202, which was extremely limited, as it required:

More information

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE REGISTRATION EXAMINATION FOR PATENT ATTORNEYS AND AGENTS APRIL 18, 2001

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE REGISTRATION EXAMINATION FOR PATENT ATTORNEYS AND AGENTS APRIL 18, 2001 Test Number 123 Name Test Series 101 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE REGISTRATION EXAMINATION FOR PATENT ATTORNEYS AND AGENTS APRIL 18, 2001 Morning Session (50 Points) Time: 3 Hours DIRECTIONS

More information

GLOSSARY of patent related terms in the IP5 STATISTICS REPORT 2016 EDITION

GLOSSARY of patent related terms in the IP5 STATISTICS REPORT 2016 EDITION GLOSSARY of patent related terms in the IP5 STATISTICS RRT 2016 EDITION Disclaimer: The explanations in this glossary are given in order to help readers of the IP5 Statistics Report understand the patent

More information

U.S. Patent Law Reform The America Invents Act

U.S. Patent Law Reform The America Invents Act U.S. Patent Law Reform The America Invents Act August 15, 2011 John B. Pegram Fish & Richardson What s New in 2011? Patent Law Reform is high on Congressional agenda A desire to legislate Bipartisan Patent

More information

America Invents Act: Patent Reform

America Invents Act: Patent Reform America Invents Act: Patent Reform Gunnar Leinberg, Nicholas Gallo, and Gerald Gibbs LeClairRyan December 2011 gunnar.leinberg@leclairryan.com; nicholas.gallo@leclaairryan.com; and gerald.gibbs@leclairryan.com

More information

Patent and License Overview. Kirsten Leute, Senior Associate Office of Technology Licensing, Stanford University

Patent and License Overview. Kirsten Leute, Senior Associate Office of Technology Licensing, Stanford University Patent and License Overview Kirsten Leute, Senior Associate Office of Technology Licensing, Stanford University kirsten.leute@stanford.edu Patent Overview History Patentable subject matter Statutory

More information

Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.

Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding. UNITED STATES patent AND TRADEMARK OFFICE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE United Statl.'.s Patent and Trademark Office Ad

More information

Navigating The USPTO First Action Interview Pilot Program

Navigating The USPTO First Action Interview Pilot Program Portfolio Media. Inc. 111 West 19 th Street, 5th Floor New York, NY 10011 www.law360.com Phone: +1 646 783 7100 Fax: +1 646 783 7161 customerservice@law360.com Navigating The USPTO First Action Interview

More information

Working Guidelines. Question Q193. Divisional, Continuation and Continuation in Part Patent Applications

Working Guidelines. Question Q193. Divisional, Continuation and Continuation in Part Patent Applications Working Guidelines by Jochen E. BÜHLING, Reporter General Dariusz SZLEPER and Thierry CALAME, Deputy Reporters General Nicolai LINDGREEN, Nicola DAGG and Shoichi OKUYAMA Assistants to the Reporter General

More information

America Invents Act of 2011 Part 1: Impact on Litigation Strategy Part 2: Strategic Considerations of the FTF Transition

America Invents Act of 2011 Part 1: Impact on Litigation Strategy Part 2: Strategic Considerations of the FTF Transition America Invents Act of 2011 Part 1: Impact on Litigation Strategy Part 2: Strategic Considerations of the FTF Transition Dave Cochran Jones Day Cleveland December 6, 2012 Part 1: Impact on Litigation Strategy

More information

AGREEMENT BETWEEN OWNERS OF PATENT RIGHTS

AGREEMENT BETWEEN OWNERS OF PATENT RIGHTS AGREEMENT BETWEEN OWNERS OF PATENT RIGHTS THIS AGREEMENT is made by and between the United States of America as represented by the Secretary of the Navy through the Naval Research Laboratory ( NRL or the

More information

AGREEMENT BETWEEN OWNERS OF PATENT RIGHTS

AGREEMENT BETWEEN OWNERS OF PATENT RIGHTS AGREEMENT BETWEEN OWNERS OF PATENT RIGHTS THIS AGREEMENT is made by and between the United States of America as represented by the Secretary of the Navy through the Naval Research Laboratory ( NRL or the

More information

Post-Grant Patent Proceedings

Post-Grant Patent Proceedings Post-Grant Patent Proceedings The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA), enacted in 2011, established new post-grant proceedings available on or after September 16, 2012, for challenging the validity of

More information

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE REGISTRATION EXAMINATION FOR PATENT ATTORNEYS AND AGENTS OCTOBER 17, Afternoon Session (50 Points)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE REGISTRATION EXAMINATION FOR PATENT ATTORNEYS AND AGENTS OCTOBER 17, Afternoon Session (50 Points) Test Number 456 Test Series 201 Name UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE REGISTRATION EXAMINATION FOR PATENT ATTORNEYS AND AGENTS OCTOBER 17, 2001 Afternoon Session (50 Points) Time: 3 Hours DIRECTIONS

More information

PATENT DISCLOSURE: Meeting Expectations in the USPTO

PATENT DISCLOSURE: Meeting Expectations in the USPTO PATENT DISCLOSURE: Meeting Expectations in the USPTO Robert W. Bahr Acting Associate Commissioner for Patent Examination Policy United States Patent and Trademark Office 11/17/2016 1 The U.S. patent system

More information

Paper 34 Tel: Entered: June 22, 2016 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD

Paper 34 Tel: Entered: June 22, 2016 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD Trials@uspto.gov Paper 34 Tel: 571-272-7822 Entered: June 22, 2016 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD APPLE INC., Petitioner, v. e-watch, INC., Patent Owner.

More information

Intellectual Property Primer. Tom Utley, PhD, CLP Licensing Officer Patent Agent

Intellectual Property Primer. Tom Utley, PhD, CLP Licensing Officer Patent Agent Intellectual Property Primer Tom Utley, PhD, CLP Licensing Officer Patent Agent Outline IP overview and Statutes What is patentable Inventorship and patent process US821,393 Flying Machine O. & W. Wright

More information

EUROPEAN PATENT OFFICE (EPO)

EUROPEAN PATENT OFFICE (EPO) PCT Applicant s Guide National Phase National Chapter Page 1 EUROPEAN PATENT OFFICE (O) AS DESIGNATED (OR ELECTED) OFFICE CONTENTS THE ENTRY INTO THE NATIONAL PHASE SUMMARY THE PROCEDURE IN THE NATIONAL

More information

Patent Prosecution in View of The America Invents Act. Overview

Patent Prosecution in View of The America Invents Act. Overview Patent Prosecution in View of The America Invents Act Courtenay C. Brinckerhoff David Dutcher Paul S. Hunter 2 Overview First-To-File (new 35 U.S.C. 102) Derivation Proceedings New Proceedings For Patent

More information

Should you elect non publication?

Should you elect non publication? Should you elect non publication? Short answer: yes, in most cases, assuming no foreign filing. Longer answer: see below. Jack S. Emery, JD, PhD jack@jacksemerypa.com March, 2013 Under current law in most

More information

Strategies... to Prepare for an Interference Washington, D.C. 17 October 2002

Strategies... to Prepare for an Interference Washington, D.C. 17 October 2002 Strategies... to Prepare for an Interference Washington, D.C. 17 October 2002 Richard A. Neifeld, Neifeld IP Law, PC Email: rneifeld@neifeld.com This slideshow is available at www.neifeld.com Join PatentInterference

More information

Managing costs and timeliness at EPO & UKIPO. Mike Jennings A.A.Thornton & Co October 2017

Managing costs and timeliness at EPO & UKIPO. Mike Jennings A.A.Thornton & Co October 2017 Managing costs and timeliness at EPO & UKIPO Mike Jennings A.A.Thornton & Co October 2017 Patent attorneys don t like: Excessive official fees such as EPO fees on entry to PCT regional phase may deter

More information

1~~~rew OFFICE OF PETITIONS RELEVANT BACKGROUND OCT UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE

1~~~rew OFFICE OF PETITIONS RELEVANT BACKGROUND OCT UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE Commissioner for Patents United States Patent and Trademark Office P.O. Box 1450 Alexandria, VA 22313-1450 www.uspto.gov OLIFF PLC P.O. BOX 320850 ALEXANDRIA VA

More information

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD. LEGEND3D, INC., Petitioner,

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD. LEGEND3D, INC., Petitioner, Trials@uspto.gov 571-272-7822 Paper No. 38 Date Entered: February 2, 2017 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE _ BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD LEGEND3D, INC., Petitioner, v. PRIME FOCUS

More information