First Inventor to File: Proposed Rules and Proposed Examination Guidelines

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

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

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

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

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

Summary of AIA Key Provisions and Respective Enactment Dates

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

Good afternoon, Please acknowledge receipt by return . Thank you, Erin Sheehan Policy Assistant

How the USPTO Rules Implement the AIA: Prosecution Strategies and Tips. by Andrew D. Meikle Birch Stewart Kolasch & Birch LLP

THE AMERICA INVENTS ACT

Considerations for the United States

MBHB snippets Alert October 13, 2011

"Grace Period" in Japan

Moving Patent Applications Through the USPTO: Options for Applicants

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

CHANGES TO IMPLEMENT THE INVENTOR S OATH OR DECLARATION PROVISIONS OF

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

Novelty. Japan Patent Office

First-Inventor-to-File

Digital lab notebooks and intellectual property protection

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

America Invents Act (AIA) The Patent Reform Law of 2011 Initial Summary

Benefits and Dangers of U.S. Provisional Applications

Patent Prosecution in View of The America Invents Act. Overview

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

Leveraging the AIA's Expanded Prior Use Defense for Patent Infringement Claims

Patent Prosecution Under The AIA

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

Paper 14 Tel: Entered: July 25, 2016 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD

Patent Law. Module F postaia Novelty. PostAIA: First to File, or, First to Publish to bar others, in 102. Patent Law, Sp.

America Invents Act: Patent Reform

Patent Reform Fact and Fiction. What You Need to Know to Prepare for the First Inventor to File Transition. November 27, 2012

The America Invents Act : What You Need to Know. September 28, 2011

STATUS OF. bill in the. Given the is presented. language. ability to would be. completely. of 35 U.S.C found in 35. bills both.

Practice Tips for Foreign Applicants

Reviewing Common Themes in Double Patenting. James Wilson, SPE 1624 TC

America Invents Act: Patent Reform

The Honorable David J. Kappos Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office

Derived Patents and Derivation Proceedings: The AIA Creates New Issues In Litigation And PTO Proceedings

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

Implications and Considerations for In-House Counsel in the Implementation of AIA First Inventor to File Provisions

The Limited Ability of a Patent Owner to Amend Claims and Present New Claims in Post-Grant and Inter Partes Reviews

AIA and Patent Due Diligence

Dynamic Drinkware, a Technical Trap for the Unwary

Professional Responsibility for IP Practitioners OED s Role and Responsibilities in Handling Grievances and Disciplinary Matters Against Practitioners

TECHNOLOGY & BUSINESS LAW ADVISORS, LLC

August 31, I. Introduction

Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A. Today s faculty features:

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

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

Application Drafting and Provisional Applications

Martín BENSADON, Alicia ALVAREZ, Damaso PARDO, Ignacio SÁNCHEZ ECHAÜE.

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

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

Tips On Maximizing Patent Term Adjustment

SEC PROVISIONS TO IMPLEMENT THE PATENT LAW TREATY

Topic 12: Priority Claims and Prior Art

Overview of the Patenting Process

PATENT LAW DEVELOPMENTS

Delain Law Office, PLLC

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT

The America Invents Act and its Effect on Universities: It Goes Beyond Just Patents. Carl P. B. Mahler II, JD UNC Charlotte

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

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

EFFECTIVE DATES OF THE VARIOUS RULES AND REQUIREMENTS

MOTIONS TO AMEND IN INTER PARTES REVIEW PROCEEDINGS A QUICK REFERENCE

Patent Exam Fall 2015

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

Three Types of Patents

A Practical Guide to Inter Partes Review. Strategic Considerations Relating To Termination

PATENT LAW. Randy Canis. Patent Searching

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

(SUCCESSFUL) PATENT FILING IN THE US

IP Innovations Class

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

Study Guidelines Study Question. Conflicting patent applications

INVENTION DISCLOSURE FORM

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

Foreign Patent Law. Why file foreign? Why NOT file foreign? Richard J. Melker

Information for Associates

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

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

PATENT PROSECUTION HIGHWAY

Il brevetto USA alla luce delle nuove regole e dei nuovi scenari competitivi

Filing Requirements for a U.S. Patent Application. Emphasis on National Stage Applications 2017 BIRCH, STEWART, KOLASCH & BIRCH LLP

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

Utilization of Prior Art Evidence on TK: Opportunities and Possibilities in the International Patent System

PATENT DISCLOSURE: Meeting Expectations in the USPTO

United States Patent and Trademark Office Registration Examination for Patent Attorneys and Agents October 16, Morning Session Model Answers

SINGAPORE IP LEGISLATION UPDATE

Federal Laboratory Consortium for Technology Transfer 2012 FLC Annual Meeting Advanced Patent Training Workshop

America Invents Act Implementing Rules. September 2012

Basic Patent Information from the USPTO (Redacted) November 15, 2007

Understanding and Applying the CREATE Act in Collaborations

AMERICA INVENTS ACT. Changes to Patent Law. Devan Padmanabhan Shareholder, Winthrop & Weinstine

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

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

Patent Law & Nanotechnology: An Examiner s Perspective. Eric Woods MiRC Technical Staff

Chapter 1800 Patent Cooperation Treaty

COMPANIES AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY COMMISSION (CIPC) (SOUTH AFRICA)

Transcription:

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 Senior Legal Advisor USPTO Office of Patent Legal Administration

First Inventor to File: Goals Provide guidance to examiners and the public on changes to examination practice in light of the AIA Address examination issues raised by the AIA Provide the Office with information to readily determine whether the application is subject to the AIA s changes to 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 2

Date Effective Date: March 16, 2013 Comments Due: October 5, 2012 3

Framework Prior Art Exceptions Label 102(a)(1) 102(b)(1)(A) Grace Period Inventor Disclosures & Grace Period Non-inventor Disclosures 102(b)(1)(B) Grace Period Intervening Disclosures 102(a)(2) 102(b)(2)(A) Non-inventor Disclosures 102(b)(2)(B) Intervening Disclosures 102(b)(2)(C) Commonly Owned Disclosures 4

35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1): Prior Art Precludes a patent if a claimed invention was, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention: Patented; Described in a Printed Publication; In Public Use; On Sale; or Otherwise Available to the Public Generally corresponds to the categories of prior art in pre-aia 35 U.S.C. 102(a) and 35 U.S.C. 102(b) 5

Sales AIA does not state whether on sale activity must be public to constitute prior art USPTO seeking public comment on the extent to which public availability plays a role in on sale prior art 6

35 U.S.C. 102(b): Exceptions Provides that certain disclosures shall not be prior art Disclosure is understood to be a generic term intended to encompass the documents and activities enumerated in AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a) 7

Grace Period Inventor and Non-inventor Disclosure Exception Grace period exceptions under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(1) for prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(1)(A): A disclosure made one year or less before the effective filing date of the claimed invention shall not be prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) if: The disclosure was made by: the inventor or joint inventor; or another who obtained the subject matter directly or indirectly from the inventor or joint inventor 8

Example 1: 102(b)(1)(A) Exception Smith s Grace Period July 2013 to June 2014 Smith publishes July 2014 Smith files Smith gets the patent because Smith s publication was by Smith within a year of filing Inventor Smith: That is my disclosure 9

Example 2: 102(b)(1)(A) Exception Smith s Grace Period July 2013 to June 2014 Taylor publishes Smith s subject matter July 2014 Smith files Smith gets the patent, if Smith shows the subject matter disclosed by Taylor was obtained from Smith Inventor Smith: That disclosure originated from me 10

Grace Period Intervening Disclosure Exception Grace period exceptions under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(1) for prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(1)(B): A disclosure made one year or less before the effective filing date of the claimed invention shall not be prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) if: The subject matter disclosed was, before such disclosure, publicly disclosed by: the inventor or joint inventor; or another who obtained the subject matter directly or indirectly from the inventor or joint inventor 11

Example 3: 102(b)(1)(B) Exception Smith s Grace Period July 2013 to June 2014 July 2014 Smith publishes Taylor publishes Smith files Smith gets the patent if the subject matter of Taylor s publication is the same subject matter of Smith s publication. Inventor Smith: I publicly disclosed the subject matter first 12

35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2): Prior Art Precludes a patent to a different inventive entity if a claimed invention was described in a: U.S. Patent; U.S. Patent Application Publication; or WIPO PCT Application Publication that was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention Generally corresponds to the categories of prior art in pre-aia 35 U.S.C. 102(e) 13

Effective Prior Art Date: Definition Effective prior art date of subject matter in patents and published applications under AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) is: actual filing date of the patent or published application, or date to which the patent or published application is entitled to claim a right of priority or benefit under 35 U.S.C. 119, 120, 121, or 365 which describes the subject matter 14

Non-inventor Disclosure Exception Exceptions under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2) for prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(A): A disclosure in an application or patent shall not be prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) if: the disclosure was made by another who obtained the subject matter directly or indirectly from the inventor or joint inventor 15

Intervening Disclosures Exception Exceptions under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2) for prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) Exception 2 (35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B)): A disclosure in an application or patent shall not be prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) if: the subject matter disclosed was, before such subject matter was effectively filed, publicly disclosed by: the inventor or joint inventor; or another who obtained the subject matter directly or indirectly from the inventor or joint inventor 16

Commonly Owned Disclosure Exception Exceptions under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2) for prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C): A disclosure made in an application or patent shall not be prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) if: the subject matter and the claimed invention were commonly owned or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention 17

Joint Research Agreements Treatment of joint research agreements under Exception 3 Common ownership exception under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art is applicable if: claimed invention was made by/on behalf of at least one party to a joint research agreement in effect on/before the effective filing date of the claimed invention; claimed invention was made as a result of activities within the scope of the joint research agreement; and application discloses the parties to the joint research agreement 18

Applicability of AIA s Prior Art Provisions AIA s FITF provisions apply to any application or patent that contains, or contained at any time, a claimed invention having an effective filing date that is on or after March 16, 2013; or AIA s FITF provisions apply to any application or patent that contains, or contained at any time, a specific reference under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, or 365(c) to an application which contains, or contained at any time, a claimed invention having an effective filing date on or after March 16, 2013 19

Applicability of Pre-AIA s Prior Art Provisions Pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(g), 135, and 291 apply to any AIA application or patent that contains, or contained at any time, any claimed invention having an effective filing date that occurs before March 16, 2013 20

Example 4: AIA s Prior Art Provisions Apply Specification includes Claims require Parent application filed before 3/16/2013 Child application filed after 3/16/2013 claiming benefit to Parent A, B, and C A, B, C, and D Not relevant Claim 1: A-C Claim 2: A-D Child application is subject to AIA prior art provisions because Claim 2 requires D, which is only supported in an application filed after 3/16/2013 Child application is also subject to pre-aia prior art provisions (i.e., former 35 U.S.C. 102(g), 135 and, if patented, 291) because Claim 1 has an effective filing date before 3/16/2013 21

Proposed Rule: Affidavits or Declarations Proposed 37 C.F.R. 1.130: Applicants may submit affidavits or declarations showing that: disclosure upon which a rejection is based was by the inventor or joint inventor, or by another who obtained the subject matter disclosed directly or indirectly from the inventor or joint inventor; or there was a prior public disclosure of the subject matter by the inventor or joint inventor, or by another who obtained the subject matter disclosed directly or indirectly from the inventor or joint inventor 22

Proposed Rule: Certified Copy Requirement Proposed rule 1.55(a)(2): Certified copy of any foreign priority application must be filed within the later of: 4 months from the actual filing date; or 16 months from the filing date of the prior foreign application Certified copy is needed prior to publication since U.S. patents and U.S. patent application publications have a prior art effect under the AIA s 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as of their earliest effective filing date including foreign priority 23

Proposed Rule: Required Statements Proposed rules 1.55(a)(4), 1.78(a)(3), and 1.78(c)(2): For nonprovisional applications that are: Filed on or after March 16, 2013; and Claim priority/benefit of a foreign, provisional, or nonprovisional application filed prior to March 16, 2013: Applicant must indicate if the application: contains, or contained at any time, a claim having an effective filing date on or after March 16, 2013; or discloses subject matter not also disclosed in the prior foreign, provisional, or nonprovisional application 24

Proposed Rule: Required Statements (cont.) Applicant is not required to: identify how many or which claims have an effective filing date on or after March 16, 2013; identify the subject matter not disclosed in the prior application; or make the second statement if the application does not disclose subject matter not also disclosed in a relied upon application filed prior to March 16, 2013 25

Proposed Rule: Required Statements Timing Proposed rules 1.55(a)(4), 1.78(a)(3), and 1.78(c)(2): Statements must be filed within the later of: 4 months from the actual filing date of the later-filed application; 4 months from the date of entry into the national stage; 16 months from the filing date of the prior-filed application from which benefit or priority is sought; or the date that a first claim having an effective filing date on or after March 16, 2013, is presented in the later-filed application 26

Appendix Changes to Implement the First Inventor to File Provisions of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, 77 Fed. Reg. 43742 (July 26, 2012) Examination Guidelines for Implementing the First- Inventor-to-File Provisions of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, 77 Fed. Reg. 43759 (July 26, 2012) 27

Questions?

Thank You