Provisional Patent Applications: Preserving IP Rights in First-to-File System

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

Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A. Today s faculty features: Satya Narayan, Attorney, Royse Law Firm, Palo Alto, Calif.

Summary Judgment Motions: Advanced Strategies for Civil Litigation

Leveraging the AIA s Joinder Provision, Recent Decisions, and New Court Procedures in Defending Infringement Disputes

Navigating Section 112 Issues in IPR Proceedings: Using Section 112 as a Sword or a Shield

Preparing for and Navigating PTAB Appeals Before the Federal Circuit

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

Defending Rule 30(b)(6) Corporate Depositions in Employment Litigation

Patent Licensing: Advanced Tactics

Drafting Trademark Settlement Agreements to Resolve IP Disputes

Leveraging Post-Grant Patent Proceedings Before the PTAB

Deposing Rule 30(b)(6) Corporate Witnesses

Navigating Section 112 Issues in IPR Proceedings: Using Section 112 as a Sword or a Shield

Challenging Unfavorable ICANN Objection and Application Decisions

Leveraging USPTO Technology Evolution Pilot Program

Patent Reexamination: The New Strategy for Litigating Infringement Claims Best Practices for Pursuing and Defending Parallel Proceedings

Defeating Liability Waivers in Personal Injury Cases: Substantive and Procedural Strategies

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

Third-Party Legal Opinions in Corporate Transactions

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

HIPAA Compliance During Litigation and Discovery

Design Patents and IPR: Challenging and Defending Validity at the PTAB

Managing Patent Infringement Risk in Product Development

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

Standards Related Patents and Standard Setting Organizations Navigating the Challenges of SSOs: Licensing, Disclosure and Litigation

Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A. Today s faculty features: Michael A. Brusca, Shareholder, Stark & Stark, Lawrenceville, N.J.

Environmental Obligations in Bankruptcy: Reconciling the Conflicting Goals of Bankruptcy and Environmental Laws

Patent Infringement Claims and Opinions of Counsel Leveraging Opinion Letters to Reduce the Risks of Liability and Enhanced Damages

Defeating Rule 23(b)(3)'s Predominance Requirement Using Defenses and Counterclaims

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

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

Rendering Third-Party Legal Opinions on LLC Status, Power, Action, Enforceability and Membership Interests

New Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure: Impact on Chapter 7, 12 and 13 Secured Creditors

Witness Examination Strategies in Employment Litigation Best Practices for Direct and Cross Examination of Lay Witnesses

FCRA Class Actions in Employment on the Rise: Avoiding and Defending Claims

Insurance Declaratory Judgment Actions and the Federal Abstention Doctrine: Strategies and Limitations

Strategic Use of Joint Defense Agreements in Litigation: Avoiding Disqualification and Privilege Waivers

Expert Witnesses: Leveraging New Rule 26 Amendments Preserving Work Product Immunity for Expert Opinions and Reports

Law Amendment and the FCPA Best Practices for Responding to a Chinese Government Commercial Bribery Investigation

Patent Litigation Before the International Trade Commission: Latest Developments

Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A. Today s faculty features: Wilson Chu, Partner, McDermott Will & Emery, Dallas

Litigating Employment Discrimination

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

Mexico's New Anti-Corruption Laws and Implementing Regulations: Private Entities and Individuals in the Crosshairs

Benefits and Dangers of U.S. Provisional Applications

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

PRP Contribution Claims Under CERCLA Strategies for Cost Recovery Against Other Potentially Responsible Parties

New ERISA Supreme Court Rulings in Conkright and Hardt Leveraging Court Guidance on Deferential Review Standards and Attorney Fee Awards

Discovery Strategies in Wage and Hour Class and Collective Actions Before and After Certification of Putative Class

Patent Prosecution Under The AIA

Article III Standing and Rule 23(b)(3) Certification: Emerging Litigation Trends

Breach of Employment Contract Litigation: Contract Interpretation, Materiality of Breach, Defenses, Damages

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

Extraterritorial Reach of Lanham Act and Protection of IP Rights: Pursuing Foreign Infringers

Appellate Practice: Identifying Issues for Appeal, Drafting Questions Presented, and Briefing the Issues

Post-Grant Reviews Before The USPTO

Solving the CERCLA Statute of Limitations and Preemption Puzzles

IP Innovations Class

Dynamic Drinkware, a Technical Trap for the Unwary

Maximizing Patent Prosecution Opportunities in Europe: Tactics for Counsel When Drafting U.S.-Origin Applications

Evidentiary Disclosures in Parallel Criminal and Civil Proceedings

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

E-Discovery and Spoliation Issues: Litigation Pitfalls, Duty to Preserve, and Claw-Back Agreements

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

LexisNexis Expert Commentaries David Heckadon on the Differences Between US and Canadian Patent Prosecution

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

Effective Discovery Strategies in Class Action Litigation Leveraging Trends and Best Practices for Depositions, Expert Witnesses and E-Discovery

First Inventor to File: Proposed Rules and Proposed Examination Guidelines

WHAT IS A PATENT AND WHAT DOES IT PROTECT?

Defending Rule 30(b)(6) Corporate Depositions Responding to a Deposition Notice, Selecting and Preparing Witnesses

Section 112 Issues in IPR Proceedings: Using Section 112 as a Sword or a Shield

AIA Post-Grant Implementation Begins - Is Your Business Strategy Aligned? August 27, A Web conference hosted by Foley & Lardner LLP

Patent Exam Fall 2015

BASICS OF PATENTS By Howard Cohn Registered Patent Attorney

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

Post-Grant Proceedings in the USPTO

PRACTICE TIPS FOR PATENT PROSECUTION BEFORE THE USPTO

Structuring Trademark Coexistence Agreements: Evaluating and Negotiating Agreements to Resolve Trademark Disputes

Navigating Jurisdictional Determinations Under the Clean Water Act: Impact of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers v. Hawkes

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

How patents work An introduction for law students

Focus on Leadership: SPAN Liaison

Pleading Standards, Affirmative Defenses and Motions to Dismiss in Federal Court

CIP S ARE USELESS BY LOUIS J. HOFFMAN HOFFMAN PATENT FIRM PHOENIX, ARIZONA NAPP 2005 CONVENTION

Design Patents: Meeting Obviousness and Novelty Requirements

AIA and Patent Due Diligence

Navigating the Patent Prosecution Highway and Other Accelerated Filing Options

OLIVE & OLIVE, P.A. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW

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

Spoliation of Evidence in Personal Injury Claims: Mitigation and Prevention

Introduction, When to File and Where to Prepare the Application

Navigating Administrative Law in Patent Appeals Involving Review Proceedings

UCC Articles 8 and 9 and the Hague Securities Convention: Investment Property Update

Information and Guidelines Concerning the Patent and Copyright Process at East Tennessee State University

Our Speakers: Rudy I. Kratz Partner; Fitch, Even, Tabin & Flannery LLP. Tony Wray Director and Founder; Optimus Patents Ltd.

Guidebook. for Japanese Intellectual Property System 2 nd Edition

This document gives a brief summary of the patent application process. The attached chart shows the most common patent protection routes.

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

U.S. Design Patent Protection. Finnish Patent Office April 10, 2018

Paper 8 Tel: Entered: October 18, 2018 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE

Transcription:

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 Applications Under the New Patent Regime THURSDAY, JANUARY 16, 2014 1pm Eastern 12pm Central 11am Mountain 10am Pacific Today s faculty features: Dale S. Lazar, Partner, DLA Piper LLP (US), Reston, Va. Timothy W. Lohse, Partner, DLA Piper LLP (US), East Palo Alto, Calif. Craig Opperman, Chief Intellectual Property Officer, Naspers, Hoofddorp, Netherlands The audio portion of the conference may be accessed via the telephone or by using your computer's speakers. Please refer to the instructions emailed to registrants for additional information. If you have any questions, please contact Customer Service at 1-800-926-7926 ext. 10.

FOR LIVE EVENT ONLY Sound Quality If you are listening via your computer speakers, please note that the quality of your sound will vary depending on the speed and quality of your internet connection. If the sound quality is not satisfactory, you may listen via the phone: dial 1-888-601-3873 and enter your PIN when prompted. Otherwise, please send us a chat or e-mail sound@straffordpub.com immediately so we can address the problem. If you dialed in and have any difficulties during the call, press *0 for assistance. Viewing Quality To maximize your screen, press the F11 key on your keyboard. To exit full screen, press the F11 key again.

FOR LIVE EVENT ONLY For CLE purposes, please let us know how many people are listening at your location by completing each of the following steps: In the chat box, type (1) your company name and (2) the number of attendees at your location Click the word balloon button to send

Provisional Patent Applications Preserving IP Rights in First-to-File System - Benefits and Limitations of Provisional Patent Applications Dale Lazar, DLA Piper Tim Lohse, DLA Piper Craig Opperman, Naspers Ltd

Provisional Patent Application Basics Created on June 8, 1995 To mimic provisional applications in the U.K. Authorized by 35 USC 111(b)(1) Assigned Serial Numbers 60/XXX,XXX 6?/XXX,XXX No examination is performed Limited review to ensure compliance with formal requirements only 5

Provisional Patent Application Basics (continued) Statutory requirements include: A specification that complies with 35 USC 112(a) Written description of the invention Disclosure that enables any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same (Enablement) Disclosure that contains the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention Filing Fee 6

Provisional Patent Application Basics (continued) Items that are NOT required under US patent laws for a provisional patent application A Provisional does NOT require any claims A Provisional cannot claim priority to another patent 7

Provisional Patent Application Basics (continued) Priority Claims to a Provisional Patent Application A US utility patent application may claim priority to a provisional patent application under 35 USC 119(e) A PCT or other foreign country filings may claim priority to the provisional patent application under 35 U.S.C. 120 or the Paris Convention. Any priority claim directly to a provisional application must be done no later than 12 months after the provisional filing date. 8

Patent Filing Strategy Using Provisional Applications Option #1: US utility and PCT filed Option #2: PCT only filed Option #1: file foreign cases Option #2: file US utility at 30 months and foreign cases Time 12 Months 30 Months 31 Months Earliest US & foreign filing date based on the provisional filing 9

Provisional Patent Application Benefits Can secure early filing date under the US AIA first-to-file system Can secure early filing date in foreign jurisdictions if the timing requirements of the Paris Convention/PCT are met Can file a provisional and later abandon within one year without publication so that trade secrets in patent application remain Can also be done with US utility Slightly lower cost as no claims are required 10

Provisional Patent Application Limitations Spend most of the cost of a full patent application (70%) to meet the US statutory requirements Can create a false sense of security A provisional that does not meet the US statutory requirements is unlikely to provide much protection or valid priority claim A poor provisional may be worse that no patent filing. Will a US provisional with no claims be sufficient for various foreign jurisdictions? Will an investor/acquirer view a provisional as being of lesser value? 11

The strategic advantages of using a Provisional Application Adds one year to the US 20-year term So brings your US patent life in line with its foreign counterparts No need to worry about claims When the product is still being developed Forces you to revisit the patent document before filing the PCT/ foreign equivalents. 12

Danger of doing this badly Most US practitioners quote substantially less to prepare a provisional AIPLA average cost is about 30% Pervasive attitude Clients, lawyers, patent practitioners That provisonals are a quick, easy and cheap way of getting patent protection. Nothing could be further from the truth! 13

Doing this wrong Will invalidate your priority claim Which will likely invalidate your US and Foreign filings Doing it cheaply substantially increases your chances of doing it wrong! 14

Here s why A provisional application provides a priority basis only if it meets 112 1 requirements Except best mode 35 U.S.C. 119(e) i.e. must have a fully enabling written description Exactly the same requirement as for a full or complete patent application. Applies for foreign priorities as well Paris Convention: Article 4(A)(3) 15

OK, so what s the problem? From a pure logical perspective How can you file an adequate patent specification for less than 50% of a complete patent s specification? Either you cannot or you are overcharging for the complete. 16

Two practical problems Don t enable a later claimed invention Don t disclose an alternative or nuance that makes it into a later claim. Either way, you don t get the priority date AND any selling/disclosure activity before the filing date of the complete/pct could invalidate your patent(s) 17

The New Railhead Nightmare Provisional discloses A, B and C Complete claims A, B and C-prime This can happen so easily with a cheap, thin technical disclosure. Invalid patent See New Railhead Mfg. v. Vermeer Mfg. Co., 298 F.3d 1290 (Fed. Cir. 2002) 18

Discussion Scenarios 1) A university needs to file a provisional to meet the statutory bar date and they send you a 40 page scholarly paper. The paper may be enabling for certain aspects of the idea, but may fail to disclose hardware (for a software implemented idea) or test data for a biotech idea and those should be added in to meet Section 101 requirements; 2) A start up with an idea provides a 2-3 page summary and a few drawings (with a bar date 2 months later) 3) A start up with an idea provides a 2-3 page summary and has a bar date the next day. 19

Discussion Scenarios 4) A big company with a software idea provides a draft of an IEEE article as the starting point for the patent. They want to file a provisional (and reduce expenses) since it is not clear that the idea will be commercially viable. 5) A university wants to file a provisional based on a draft of a scholarly paper (no immediate bar date) because the university does not yet have a licensee for the idea and wants to reduce expenses. 20

Dale S. Lazar DLA Piper LLP (US), Reston, Va. 703.773.4149 dale.lazar@dlapiper.com Timothy W. Lohse DLA Piper LLP (US), East Palo Alto, Calif. 650.833.2055 timothy.lohse@dlapiper.com Craig Opperman Naspers, Hoofddorp, Netherlands copperman@naspers.com 21