How to Manage Final Office Actions and Responses and RCE Practice
|
|
- Reynard Strickland
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1
2 How to Manage Final Office Actions and Responses and RCE Practice
3 How to Manage Final Office Actions and Responses and RCE Practice Presenters: Ann McCrackin, President, Black Hills IP, LLC Peter Rebuffoni, Manager of Legal Operations, Schwegman Lundberg & Woessner, P.A. Tim Grathwol, Principal, Schwegman Lundberg & Woessner, P.A. and Adjunct/Affiliated Professor at Mitchell Hamline School of Law
4 Where does a USPTO Final Rejection occur in the prosecution process? A typical patent prosecution cycle includes the following basic steps: Application is filed A restriction requirement may be issued A pre-examination interview may be conducted If all claims are allowed, the application will obtain a notice of allowance If application not allowed, a first non-final rejection is issued, indicating if any claims are allowed, and providing a basis for any rejections Following a non-final rejection, an examiner interview may be taken, if any claims are rejected and applicant seeks to conduct an interview Following the interview, or if none is taken, a response to the non-final rejection is filed After considering the response to the non-final rejection, the application is either allowed, or a final rejection is issued by the examiner
5 What are requirements when a USPTO Final Rejection is received? Once a final rejection is received, the application will go abandoned unless one of the following occurs before the six month deadline: The application is continued by filing of a request for continued examination (RCE) The application is allowed The application is appealed Even if the application is allowed to go abandoned, the claims of the application could be pursued using a Rule 60 continuation filed with co-pendency This must be filed before application goes into extension, or the application extended for the purpose of filing the Rule 60 application If none of the above occur, the application will go abandoned, with no right to continue pursuit of disclosed subject matter
6 What are optional actions that can be taken when a USPTO Final Rejection is received? An after-final interview can be sought to negotiate allowable subject matter to place case in condition for allowance An after-final amendment/response can be filed to amend claims to place in condition for allowance or improve the application for an appeal But, an examiner is not required to give an interview or consider an after final amendment The applicant may reach an agreement with the examiner to allow the application subject to the filing of an RCE and an accompanying amendment AFCP 2.0 Request filed with amendment, providing additional (limited) time for Examiner to consider amendments and perform searching File RCE in otherwise allowable application to have prior art considered File Notice of Appeal
7 What are typical docketing requirements for a USPTO Final Rejection? The core docketing requirement for a final rejection is a: Three, four, five and six month deadlines to file an RCE or appeal, if a notice of allowance has not been obtained. Typical additional docket dates are: One month docket date to review for any prior art newly received or not not cited Docketing in other related files to cite art cited in final rejection One month (or two month) date (one month from final rejection) to consider an interview or file an after-final amendment File Notice of Appeal (either with response, by itself, with preappeal brief request for review) File RCE
8 Example Docketing Entries for Final Rejection 2 months Final Office Action Response Due - 2 month Pre-Appeal Brief Due - 2 month (reminder) Notice of Appeal Due - 2 month (reminder) 3 months Final Office Action Response Due - 3 month Pre-Appeal Brief Due - 3 month (Due Date) Notice of Appeal Due - 3 month (Due Date) 4-5 months Same as 3-months 6 months Final Office Action Response Due - Final Deadline Pre-Appeal Brief Due - Final Deadline (final date) Notice of Appeal Due - Final Deadline (final date)
9 What is typical Law Firm workflow docketing requirements for a USPTO Final Rejection? The typical workflow docketing of law firm for a final rejection are: Report of rejection to client/counsel Administrative tasks put on staff docket Substantive analysis on attorney docket Report sent/assembled according to docketed process Call/meeting with client to discuss options, or receive written instructions from client Prepare response or appeal or abandon
10 What is typical corporate in-house IP department workflow docketing requirements for a USPTO Final Rejection? The typical workflow docketing of a client/corporation for a final rejection are: Receive report of rejection from PTO or law firm Call/meeting with law firm to discuss options, or provide written instructions to law firm OR Call/meeting with inside executives to discuss options Determine budget constraints After decision, update budget projections with any expenses authorized Delegate/authorize and/or Prepare response or appeal or abandon
11 What are examples of reports provided to inhouse counsel by outside counsel? Example of written report (such as a memo or standard form document): Basic identifying information about the matter Listing of prosecution history Listing of related family members (along with status) Summary of current rejections Listing of currently pending claims Detailed recommendation by attorney/agent for providing claim amendments and response argument strategy in view of rejections As an alternative, the written report could be a spreadsheet providing all/some of the information mentioned above. These reports are commonly used during telephonic prosecution meetings to guide conversation. Screen sharing programs such as Zoom, Skype, or GoToMeeting can be used to share screens back and forth and present more detailed information, figures, etc. for discussion.
12 What are examples of strategic considerations for continuing pursuit of application? Breadth of claims possible Product coverage for client s products, for example to preclude copying Potential or actual ability to cover competitor products for licensing purposes Other considerations Design-around possibilities to build a fence/wall of protection around the technology Maintaining pendency of application in view of current or future litigation with competitor to keep opportunity to draft targeted claims or leverage during negotiations information about currently unclaimed but potentially valuable features disclosed in spec
13 Important information to feed back to prosecution counsel Information about clients product design and product plans Information about competitor product design or direction other?
14 Example Law Firm Checklist for Receipt of Final Office Action Verify that the action is FINAL Office Action Summary page includes a check mark in box 2a ( This action is FINAL ) Examiner Conclusion paragraph includes an indication that this action is made final and sets forth that shortened statutory period for responding and also noting period for responding to an advisory action Verify that the correct period for response (2 months) is noted in your docketing database If application was Track 1 (prioritized examination), a final office action removes the application from Track 1. Any docketing or expedited procedures you have in place for flagging Track 1 applications no longer apply. Verify whether any references/prior art in file still need to be cited to the patent office in an IDS/SIDS
15 Example Law Firm Checklist for Response to Final Office Action Confirm that the version of the draft being filed is the final version and that all response pages and associated documents are present Confirm that all fees are being paid and deposit account authorization for any additional fees due is clearly noted Check whether any art exists in file that may need to be cited in an IDS/SIDS If filing on or before the two-month due date, docket for expected receipt of an advisory action/notice of allowance If filing after the three-month due date, check whether an RCE/Notice of Appeal should accompany the response to keep the application alive and avoid unnecessary extension of time fees Has an Interview Request been considered/summarized? Has an After-Final Consideration Pilot (AFCP) 2.0 request been considered/included if applicable? Can a Terminal Disclaimer filing (in response to any double patenting rejection) be deferred or avoided?
16 Use of patent analytics to make prosecution decisions
17 Use of patent analytics to make prosecution decisions
18 Use of patent analytics to make prosecution decisions
19 QUESTIONS Questions on Today s Program Please submit your questions using the Q&A button on the control bar on your screen. If you have questions regarding Black Hills IP s services or processes, please contact: Jim Brophy Ph jbrophy@blackhillsip.com
DIFFICULT EPO ACTIONS TO DOCKET uithe Reliability of your IP Data your IP Data Integrity: How to Ruin the Reliability of your IP Data
DIFFICULT EPO ACTIONS TO DOCKET uithe Reliability of your IP Data your IP Data Integrity: How to Ruin the Reliability of your IP Data Difficult EPO Docketing Items Presenters and panelists: o Ann McCrackin,
More informationUnderstanding Docketing For the Appeal Process In China, Korea, And Japan uithe Reliability of your IP Data your IP Data Integrity: How to Ruin the
1 Understanding Docketing For the Appeal Process In China, Korea, And Japan uithe Reliability of your IP Data your IP Data Integrity: How to Ruin the Reliability of your IP Data 2 3 4 Understanding Docketing
More informationBEST PRACTICES FOR EFFICIENT DOCKETING OF ROUTINE FORMALITIES: PART 1
BEST PRACTICES FOR EFFICIENT DOCKETING OF ROUTINE FORMALITIES: PART 1 Best Practices for Efficient Docketing of Routine Formalities Presenters: o Ann McCrackin, President, Black Hills IP, LLC o Kristi
More informationAGENCY: 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 informationAfter 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 informationBest Practices and Options for Double Docketing to Reduce Risk of Missed Dates uithe Reliability of your IP Data your IP Data Integrity: How to Ruin
Best Practices and Options for Double Docketing to Reduce Risk of Missed Dates uithe Reliability of your IP Data your IP Data Integrity: How to Ruin the Reliability of your IP Data Docket Cross-Off Vulnerabilities
More informationTOP 3 PATENT DOCKETING VULNERABILITIES AND UNRECOVERABLE DATES. September 14, 2016
TOP 3 PATENT DOCKETING VULNERABILITIES AND UNRECOVERABLE DATES September 14, 2016 Presenters Ann McCrackin President Black Hills IP Zhakalazky Carrion Docketing Manager Schwegman Lundberg & Woessner Overview
More informationUnderstanding 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 informationUSPTO 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 informationUSPTO 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 informationPrioritized 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 informationAccelerated 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 informationIPDAS 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 informationNew 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 informationUnited 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 informationAugust 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 informationShould 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 informationNormal 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 informationStrategies 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 informationK&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 informationFast 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 informationPatent Advisor TM. Application Report October 2, 2012
Patent Advisor TM Application Report October 2, 2012 13/022,445 TWO-PHASE HEAT TRANSFER SYSTEM INCLUDING A THERMAL CAPACITANCE DEVICE AND RELATED METHODS February 7, 2011 (22257US02 Pending 3785 250786932
More informationPRACTICE TIPS FOR PATENT PROSECUTION BEFORE THE USPTO
PRACTICE TIPS FOR PATENT PROSECUTION BEFORE THE USPTO HERSHKOVITZ IP GROUP INTA 2012 WASHINGTON, D.C. www.hershkovitzipgroup.com Try to obtain written instructions (Order Letter) from client (the following
More informationPolicies 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 informationGet 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 informationAnnex 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 informationMoving Patent Applications Through the USPTO: Options for Applicants
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
More informationQUESTION PAPER REFERENCE: FC3 PERCENTAGE MARK AWARDED: 59% six months after the publication of European search report
QUESTION PAPER REFERENCE: FC3 PERCENTAGE MARK AWARDED: 59% Question 1 a) Deadline for validating granted European patent in EPC six months after the publication of European search report 0 b) i) Germany
More informationManaging 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 informationPractice 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 information2001 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 informationChanges 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 informationPriority 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 informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ANSWER
CASE 0:12-cv-00528-RHK-JJK Document 31 Filed 07/20/12 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF PHYSICS and JOHN WILEY & SONS, INC., vs. Plaintiffs, SCHWEGMAN
More informationUSPTO 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 informationPart IV: Supplemental Examination
Strategic Considerations in View of the USPTO s Proposed Rules Part IV: Supplemental Examination Presented By: Sam Woodley & Irene Hudson Fish & Richardson AIA Webinar Series Date March 27, 2012 April
More informationLAWSON & PERSSON, P.C.
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY SERVICES Attorney Michael J. Persson (Mike) is a Registered Patent Attorney and practices primarily in the field of intellectual property law and litigation. The following materials
More informationPost-Allowance Prosecution: The End Game That Goes On To The End
Post-Allowance Prosecution: The End Game That Goes On To The End By Robert M. Hansen i Partner The Marbury Law Group, PLLC 11800 Sunrise Valley Dr., 15 th Floor Reston, VA 20191 703-391-2900 703-391-2901
More informationAfter Final Consideration Pilot Program 2.0 Description and Memorandum of Understanding. September 23,2014
After Final Consideration Pilot Program 2.0 Description and Memorandum of Understanding September 23,2014 Description of Pilot: 1) The USPTO has determined to modify the previous After Final Consideration
More informationSeeking Information About Court Automation a Ten Minute Online Survey
Seeking Information About Court Automation a Ten Minute Online Survey This survey is designed and administered by staff of the World Bank. Its purpose is to gather information about the extent to which
More informationPatent Reexamination: The New Strategy for Litigating Infringement Claims Best Practices for Pursuing and Defending Parallel Proceedings
presents Patent Reexamination: The New Strategy for Litigating Infringement Claims Best Practices for Pursuing and Defending Parallel Proceedings A Live 90-Minute Teleconference/Webinar with Interactive
More informationThe America Invents Act : What You Need to Know. September 28, 2011
The America Invents Act : What You Need to Know September 28, 2011 Presented by John B. Pegram J. Peter Fasse 2 The America Invents Act (AIA) Enacted September 16, 2011 3 References: AIA = America Invents
More informationPatent 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 informationImproving 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 informationRisky Business: Ethical Challenges Facing IP Law Firm Management Presented by
Risky Business: Ethical Challenges Facing IP Law Firm Management Presented by Michael E. McCabe Jr., Esq LI01 9/15/2016 3:15 PM - 4:15 PM The handouts and presentations attached are copyright and trademark
More informationChapter 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 informationFINAL 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 information1~0 ll,,[e~ Alexandria, VA
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE In re Patent No. 8,431,604 Issued: April 30, 2013 Application No. 10/590,265 Filing or 371(c) Date: June 14, 2007 Dkt. No.: 030270-1073 (7353US01) Commissioner
More informationInformation 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 informationThe petition to change patent term adjustment determination under 35 U.S.C. 154(b) from 153 days to a 318 days is DENIED.
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE FISH & RICHARDSON P.C. MAILED P.O. BOX 1022 SEP 13 2011 MINNEAPOLIS MN 55440-1022 OFFICE OF PETITIONS In re Patent No. 7,855,318 Xu Issue Date: December 21, 2010
More informationWHAT IS A PATENT AND WHAT DOES IT PROTECT?
WHAT IS A PATENT AND WHAT DOES IT PROTECT? A patent is a monopoly granted by the government for an invention that works or functions differently from other inventions. It is necessary for the invention
More informationChapter 2 Internal Priority
Note: When any ambiguity of interpretation is found in this provisional translation, the Japanese text shall prevail. Chapter 2 Internal Priority Patent Act Article 41 1 A person requesting the grant of
More informationTERANET CONNECT USER S GUIDE Version 1.4 August 2013
TERANET CONNECT USER S GUIDE Version 1.4 August 2013 Table of Contents 1. Introduction... 1 2. Getting Started... 1 2.1 Configurable Setting in The Conveyancer... 2 3. Ordering a Parcel Register... 3 4.
More informationNew Zealand Nouvelle-Zélande Neuseeland. Report Q193. in the name of the New Zealand Group by Tim JACKSON
New Zealand Nouvelle-Zélande Neuseeland Report Q193 in the name of the New Zealand Group by Tim JACKSON Divisional, Continuation and Continuation in Part Patent Applications Questions I) Analysis of the
More informationJohn 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 informationNavigating 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 informationPatent Public Advisory Committee Public Hearing on the Proposed Patent Fee Schedule
This document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on 08/01/2018 and available online at https://federalregister.gov/d/2018-16432, and on govinfo.gov 3510-16-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE United
More informationStrategies... 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 informationREPORT OF THE JUDICIAL COUNCIL APPEALS FROM TERMINATION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS ADVISORY COMMITTEE. November 26, 2007
REPORT OF THE JUDICIAL COUNCIL APPEALS FROM TERMINATION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS ADVISORY COMMITTEE November 26, 2007 BACKGROUND In May 2007, the Kansas Supreme Court requested that the Judicial Council study
More informationThe Scope and Ramifications of the New Post-Grant and Inter Partes Review Proceedings at the USPTO
The Scope and Ramifications of the New Post-Grant and Inter Partes Review Proceedings at the USPTO By Lawrence A. Stahl and Donald H. Heckenberg The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA) makes numerous
More informationPatent 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 informationOverview on EPO s Current Initiatives for Improving Timeliness. Heli Pihlajamaa Director Patent Law
Overview on EPO s Current Initiatives for Improving Timeliness Heli Pihlajamaa Director Patent Law 14 October 2016 Content Time matters Early Certainty Expediting the Proceedings Streamlined opposition
More informationLexisNexis Information Professional
LexisNexis Information Professional 2013 Update Product updates and research strategies from the LexisNexis Librarian Relations Group TABLE OF CONTENTS November/ December 2013 Lexis Diligence: now reach
More informationWorld Trademark Review
Issue 34 December/January 2012 Also in this issue... Lessons from the BBC s approach to trademarks How to protect fictional brands in the real world What the Interflora decision will mean in practice Letters
More informationRepresenting Yourself In Employment Arbitration: An Employee s Guide
Representing Yourself In Employment Arbitration: An Employee s Guide What is the American Arbitration Association? The American Arbitration Association (AAA ) is a not-for-profit, private, public service
More informationDrafting Trademark Settlement Agreements to Resolve IP Disputes
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Drafting Trademark Settlement Agreements to Resolve IP Disputes Negotiating Exhaustion of Infringing Materials, Restrictions on Future Trademark
More information3 Tex. Intell. Prop. L.J Texas Intellectual Property Law Journal Spring, 1995 METAMORPHOSIS IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
3 Tex. Intell. Prop. L.J. 249 Texas Intellectual Property Law Journal Spring, 1995 METAMORPHOSIS IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE Al Harrison a1 Copyright (c) 1995 by the State Bar of Texas,
More informationChanges 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 informationPATENT 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 informationUNITED 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 informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION
Case 1:11-cv-02964-TCB Document 72 Filed 02/06/15 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION BARCO, N.V. and BARCO, INC., v. Plaintiffs, EIZO
More informationDelain 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 informationJames D. Hallenbeck (Officer, Minneapolis Office)
Andre L. Marais (Managing Shareholder, Silicon Valley Office) 408 278 4042 amarais@slwip.com James D. Hallenbeck (Officer, Minneapolis Office) 612 373 6938 jhallenbeck@slwip.com Patent Prosecution Highway
More informationPATENT QUALITY: WHAT WOULD A ZERO- BASED PATENTING PARADIGM LOOK LIKE?
PATENT QUALITY: WHAT WOULD A ZERO- BASED PATENTING PARADIGM LOOK LIKE? File, Examine and Issue Patents in One Year Leverage Applicant Disclosures Optimize Quality/Productivity Robert A. Armitage Consultant,
More informationPANEL NEWS ALERT - MARCH 2006
PANEL NEWS ALERT - MARCH 2006 Grant of Certiorari in Cunningham v. California As undoubtedly all panel attorneys are aware, the United States Supreme Court has granted certiorari to review the question
More informationUNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE TRADEMARK MANUAL OF EXAMINING PROCEDURE (TMEP) Chapter 600 Attorney, Representative, and Signature
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE TRADEMARK MANUAL OF EXAMINING PROCEDURE (TMEP) Chapter 600 Attorney, Representative, and Signature April 2016 TABLE OF CONTENTS 601 Owner of Mark May Be Represented
More informationNavigating 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~O~rE~ OFFICE OF PETITIONS JAN Haisam Yakoub 2700 Saratoga Place #815 Ottawa ON K1T 1W4 CA CANADA
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE ~O~rE~ JAN 2 0 2016 Commissioner for Patents United States Patent and Trademark Office P.O. Box 1450 Alexandria, VA 22313-1450 www.uspto.gov OFFICE OF PETITIONS
More informationPatent 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 informationRULES FOR KAISER PERMANENTE MEMBER ARBITRATIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE OFFICE OF THE INDEPENDENT ADMINISTRATOR
RULES FOR KAISER PERMANENTE MEMBER ARBITRATIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE OFFICE OF THE INDEPENDENT ADMINISTRATOR AMENDED AS OF JANUARY 1, 2016 TABLE OF CONTENTS A. GENERAL RULES...1 1. Goal...1 2. Administration
More informationBC Child Support Recalculation Service Evaluation of the Pilot Implementation Phase
BC Child Support Recalculation Service Evaluation of the Pilot Implementation Phase May 28 The Child Support Recalculation Service pilot project, including the preparation of the evaluation report, was
More informationTerminating Inter Partes Review Proceedings Before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board
Terminating Inter Partes Review Proceedings Before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board Eldora L. Ellison, Ph.D. Dennies Varughese, Pharm. D. Trey Powers, Ph.D. I. Introduction Among the myriad changes precipitated
More informationSTREETBLAST MEDIA, LLC. PO BOX 176 FAIRDALE, KENTUCKY 40118
STREETBLAST MEDIA, LLC. PO BOX 176 FAIRDALE, KENTUCKY 40118 CONTRACT & TERMS: Enterprise Social Media Strategy Consulting Agreement legal@streetblastmedia.com This Consulting Agreement (the "Agreement")
More informationPresented 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 informationIntroduction. 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 informationCase 2:05-cv TJW Document 212 Filed 12/21/2005 Page 1 of 5
Case 2:05-cv-00195-TJW Document 212 Filed 12/21/2005 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION DIGITAL CHOICE OF TEXAS, LLC V. CIVIL NO. 2:05-CV-195(TJW)
More informationTMEP 6 TH EDITION: Highlights of Changes. December 7, 2009
TMEP 6 TH EDITION: Highlights of Changes December 7, 2009 1 TMEP 6 th Edition Incorporates Exam Guides since the TMEP 5 th Edition: Letters of Protest Description of the Mark Section 2(b) Flags/Coats of
More informationAccelerating 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 informationWHAT TO DO WHEN YOU OR ANOTHER ATTORNEY CAN NO LONGER PRACTICE LAW
WHAT TO DO WHEN YOU OR ANOTHER ATTORNEY CAN NO LONGER PRACTICE LAW CLAUDE DUCLOUX, Austin Hill, Ducloux, Carnes & de la Garza State Bar of Texas LAWYER COMPETENCY IN THE 21 ST CENTURY November 21, 2014
More informationGENERAL RULES OF PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE FOR THE NORTH CAROLINA BUSINESS COURT. Amended and Effective January 1, Rule Title Page No.
GENERAL RULES OF PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE FOR THE NORTH CAROLINA BUSINESS COURT Amended and Effective January 1, 2017 Rule Title Page No. 1 Purpose and Scope 1 2 Mandatory Business Court Designation 3 3
More informationProvisional Patent Applications: Preserving IP Rights in First-to-File System
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Provisional Patent Applications: Preserving IP Rights in First-to-File System Assessing Whether to Use - and Strategies for Leveraging Provisional
More informationJune 29, 2011 Submitted by: Julie P. Samuels Staff Attorney Michael Barclay, Reg. No. 32,553 Fellow Electronic Frontier Foundation
To: Kenneth M. Schor, Office of Patent Legal Administration, Office of the Associate Commissioner for Patent Examination Policy To: reexamimprovementcomments@uspto.gov Docket No: PTO-P-2011-0018 Comments
More informationCase 1:17-cv JPO Document 47 Filed 05/23/18 Page 1 of 5
Case 1:17-cv-08853-JPO Document 47 Filed 05/23/18 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ALTAREEK GRICE, -v- Plaintiff, PEPSI BEVERAGES COMPANY, et al., Defendants. 17-CV-8853
More informationIP 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 informationCase GLT Doc 644 Filed 06/30/17 Entered 06/30/17 13:52:10 FILED Desc Main Document Page 1 of 20
Case 17-22045-GLT Doc 644 Filed 06/30/17 Entered 06/30/17 135210 FILED Desc Main Document Page 1 of 20 6/30/17 133 pm CLERK U.S. BANKRUPTCY IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT COURT - WDPA FOR THE WESTERN
More informationBlue Ribbon Commission
Blue Ribbon Commission June 2017 Status Summary Kansas Supreme Court Blue Ribbon Commission Recommendations Following are the recommendations made by the Kansas Supreme Court s Blue Ribbon Commission,
More informationDraft Guidance for Industry: ANDA Submissions Amendments and Easily Correctable Deficiencies Under GDUFA
Draft Guidance for Industry: ANDA Submissions Amendments and Easily Correctable Deficiencies Under GDUFA Elizabeth Giaquinto, JD Office of Generic Drugs GDUFA Goal Information Beginning on October 1, 2014
More informationStrategic Use of Post-Grant Proceedings In Light of Patent Reform
Strategic Use of Post-Grant Proceedings In Light of Patent Reform October 11, 2011 The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act U.S. House of Representatives passed H.R. 1249 (technical name of the bill) on June
More informationRoyal Society of Chemistry Law Group. Recent Case Law Relevant to Chemistry
Royal Society of Chemistry Law Group Recent Case Law Relevant to Chemistry Recent IP Case Law from the US Presenter: Don Lewis Topics KSR v. Teleflex and aftermath Tafas & GSK v. Dudas and aftermath New
More informationLR Case management pilot program for criminal cases. A. Scope; application. This is a special pilot rule governing time limits for criminal
LR2-308. Case management pilot program for criminal cases. A. Scope; application. This is a special pilot rule governing time limits for criminal proceedings in the Second Judicial District Court. This
More information