Patent Prosecution Under The AIA

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

America Invents Act: Patent Reform

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

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

America Invents Act: Patent Reform

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

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

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

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

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.

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

CORRECTION OF ISSUED PATENTS

Considerations for the United States

Inequitable Conduct Judicial Developments

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

These materials are public information and have been prepared solely for educational and entertainment purposes to contribute to the understanding of

Patents and the Protection of Proprietary Biotechnology Information

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

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

Delain Law Office, PLLC

Chapter 1400 Correction of Patents

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

First-Inventor-to-File

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

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

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

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

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

TECHNOLOGY & BUSINESS LAW ADVISORS, LLC

EFFECTIVE DATES OF THE VARIOUS RULES AND REQUIREMENTS

10 THINGS YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT PATENT REFORM. W. Edward Ramage Chair, IP Group Baker Donelson

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

2001 through 2017 IPLEGALED, Inc. All Rights Reserved

U.S. Patent Law Reform The America Invents Act

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

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

FINAL RULES IMPLEMENTING EIGHTEEN MONTH PUBLICATION OF PATENT APPLICATIONS

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

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

Patent Prosecution in View of The America Invents Act. Overview

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

Should you elect non publication?

THE AMERICA INVENTS ACT

New Post Grant Proceedings: Basics by

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

Part IV: Supplemental Examination

First Inventor to File: Proposed Rules and Proposed Examination Guidelines

POST-GRANT REVIEW UNDER THE AMERICA INVENTS ACT GERARD F. DIEBNER TANNENBAUM, HELPERN, SYRACUSE & HIRSCHTRITT LLP

IPDAS Forms Library: A Complete List

Application Drafting and Provisional Applications

QUESTION PAPER REFERENCE: FC3 PERCENTAGE MARK AWARDED: 59% six months after the publication of European search report

THE MUDDY METAPHYSICS OF INVENTORSHIP: WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW

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

Pre-Issuance Submissions under the America Invents Act

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

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

Post-Grant Patent Practice: Review & Reexamination Course Syllabus

John Doll Commissioner for Patents. February 1, 2006

PRACTICE TIPS FOR PATENT PROSECUTION BEFORE THE USPTO

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

PATENT LAW DEVELOPMENTS

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

Key Words Glossary Contents

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

The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA)

US Patent Prosecution Duty to Disclose

Monitoring Practitioner Compliance With Disciplinary Rules and Inequitable Conduct

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

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

Venue Differences. Claim Amendments During AIA Proceedings 4/16/2015. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board

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

Practice Tips for Foreign Applicants

Threats & Opportunities in Proceedings before the EPO with a brief update on the Unitary Patent

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

2012 Winston & Strawn LLP

POTENTIAL UPCOMING CHANGES IN U.S. PATENT LAWS: THE PUBLICATION OF PATENT APPLICATIONS

CHANGES TO IMPLEMENT THE INVENTOR S OATH OR DECLARATION PROVISIONS OF

2011 Foley & Lardner LLP Attorney Advertising Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome Models used are not clients but may be representative

USPTO PUBLISHES FINAL RULES FOR DERIVATION PROCEEDINGS UNDER AMERICA INVENTS ACT

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

America Invents Act (AIA) Post-Grant Proceedings

GLOSSARY OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY TERMS

After Final Practice and Appeal

August 31, I. Introduction

Prosecuting an Israel Patent Application and Beyond

Congress Passes Historic Patent Reform Legislation

Post-Allowance Prosecution: The End Game That Goes On To The End

Chapter 2300 Interference Proceedings

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

America Invents Act: The Practical Effects of the New USPTO Post-Grant Proceedings

AIA Post-Grant Proceedings: Lessons Learned from PTAB and Federal Circuit Decisions

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

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

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

Navigating through the Obviousness-Type Double Patenting Minefield Landslide Vol. 10, No. 3 January/February 2018

Change in Procedure Relating to an Application Filing Date

Patent Prosecution Update

Advanced Topics in Double Patenting

February, 2010 Patent Reform Legislative Update 1

U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Issues Proposed Rules for Post-Issuance Patent Review under the America Invents Act

Transcription:

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 and entertainment purposes to contribute to the understanding of U.S. intellectual property law and practice. These materials reflect only the personal views of the speaker and cannot be considered legal advice. It is understood that each case is fact-specific, and that the appropriate solution in any case will vary. Therefore, these materials may or may not be relevant to any particular situation. Thus, Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP and the speaker cannot be bound either philosophically or as representatives of their various present and future clients to the comments expressed in these materials. The presentation of these materials does not establish any form of attorney-client relationship with Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP and the speaker. While every attempt was made to insure that these materials are accurate, errors or omissions may be contained therein, for which any liability is disclaimed. 2

First-To-File (or Disclose): Keep Your Eyes On The Prize What has changed under the AIA first-to-file provisions? Whether to make a transition statement when filing an Application. Whether or not references qualify as prior art. Context: Need to file an application or prepare a Response to an Office Action. Limited budget and short time frame. 3

Three Steps To Determine What Is Prior Art Step 1: Determine Which Law Applies Step 2: Determine The Effective Filing Date Step 3: Determine If a Disclosure Is Prior Art Under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)1 or 102(a)2 4

To Check or Not To Check? Step 1: Determine whether an Application is Pre-AIA, Post-AIA, or a Transition Application. The real question: which law applies to this application? 5

Step 1A: Determine The Chain of Priority Step 1A: Determine the Filing Date and Claim of Priority of the specific Application that you are working on. Look to the Filing Receipt in Public PAIR. http://portal.uspto.gov/pair/publicpair 6

Establishing A Time Line JP 153 12/02/04 PCT 591 12/01/05 371 Nat. Stage 828 04/29/08 Con. 195 01/04/11 AIA 3/16/13 7

Step 1B: Two Easy Cases Was The Filing Date of the present Application Before March 16, 2013? Note: if 371 National Stage, use the PCT filing date. If yes, AIA does not apply. Use Pre-AIA law. Was The Filing Date of the present Application on or after 3/16/13 and does not claim priority to a Pre-3/16/13 Effective Filing Date? If yes, AIA applies. See, 35 U.S.C. 100(i). 8

Two Easy Cases: Non-Transition Applications Pre-AIA Application: the application was filed before March 16, 2013. JP 12/02/04 PCT 12/01/05 371 Nat. Stage 04/29/08 Con. 01/04/11 AIA 3/16/13 Post-AIA Application: the application does not claim priority to an application filed before March 16, 2013. AIA 3/16/13 JP 4/27/14 PCT 4/25/15 371 Nat. Stage 12/31/16 Div. 7/14/17 9

The Third Case: The Transition Application If the Filing Date of the present Application was filed On or After 3/16/13 and claims priority to a Pre-3/16/13 Effective Filing Date, then the Application is a Transition Application. JP 12/02/04 PCT 12/01/05 371 Nat. Stage 04/29/08 AIA 3/16/13 Con. 01/04/15 Next Question: Is the Application a Hybrid Application? 10

Step 1C: Is the Transition Application Pre-AIA or a Hybrid? Determine if the Application is a Hybrid Application. Was there any New Subject Matter in any claim between The Filing Date of the Present Application and March 16, 2013? (includes intervening apps.) > If New Subject Matter, then Hybrid Application, and both Post-AIA 102 and old 102(g) (first to invent) apply. > If No New Subject Matter, then Pre-AIA. JP 12/02/04 PCT 12/01/05 371 Nat. Stage 04/29/08 AIA 3/16/13 Con. 01/04/115 11

Transition Statement Summary: To Check or Not to Check? Four Types of Application: Pre-AIA: all filing dates before 3/16/13 >> don t check. Post-AIA: all priority dates after 3/16/13 >> don t check. Non-Hybrid Transition Application: Filed After 3/16/13, but claims priority before 3/16/13, and no New Subject Matter on day of filing >> don t check. Hybrid Transition Application: Filed After 3/16/13, but claims priority before 3/16/13, and has New Subject Matter on day of filing >> must check the box. 12

New Subject Matter vs. New Matter Avoid Having To Make A Transition Statement: Claim amendments after the filing date can introduce New Matter. > Results in 132 objection and/or 112 rejection, but no loss of priority. Claim amendments on the day of filing can introduce New Subject Matter. > Results in loss of priority, but no objection. Avoid Hybrid Applications by filing the claims of a Pre-AIA Application verbatim or only deleting claims. > Amend the next day to avoid introducing New Subject Matter. 13

Determining Prior Art for Office Actions If Starting with an Office Action, Choice of Law is even easier to determine. 14

Step 2: Determine The Effective Filing Date Effective Filing Date is the earliest filing date for which the application has claim of priority under 35 U.S.C. 119, 120, or 121 and a claim has 112 support. Claim-by-claim basis. What is the earliest Foreign Priority, U.S. Provisional, PCT Application, or U.S. Application to which you have priority? 15

Step 3A: Determine If A Disclosure Is Prior Art Under 102(a)(1) Step 3A: Was the disclosure patented, published, on sale, in public use, or otherwise publically available any where in the world, more than one year prior to the Effective Filing Date of a claim? If so, the entire disclosure Is prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1). > See, 102(a)(1) and (b)(1). 16

Step 3B: Determine If A Disclosure Is Prior Art Under 102(a)(1) Step 3B: Was the disclosure patented, published, on sale, publically used, or otherwise publically available any where in the world one year or less prior to the Effective Filing Date of a claim? If yes, proceed as if the disclosure is prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1). Inquire about disclosures by the inventor or co-inventor. 17

The Uncertainty of Disclosure Even if an exception under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(1) applies: a Disclosure is interpreted narrowly. The Subject Matter removed only applies to the parts of a Disclosure that are identical. > Can differ by mode. (e.g., poster vs. paper) > Can be non-verbatim. > Can be a more general description of what is claimed. (e.g., genus is not art against species) 18

Step 3C: Determine If A Disclosure Is Prior Art Under 102(a)(2) Step 3C: Was the cited Disclosure a U.S. Patent, U.S. Patent Publication, or PCT Publication designating the U.S., having non-identical inventorship, and has a filing date before the Effective Filing Date of a claim? If no, not prior art under 102(a)(2). If yes and common assignee as of the Effective Filing Date, then 102(b)(3) exception applies. If yes, and no common assignee as above, proceed as if prior art under 102(a)(2). 19

Step 3D: Not Prior Art Step 3D: Was the disclosure publically available and had an effective filing date after the Effective Filing Date of a claim? If yes, then the Disclosure is not prior art. The Disclosure cannot be cited as prior art for anticipation or obviousness rejection. 20

Prioritized Examination (a.k.a. Track One or Fast-Track ) Petition to have an application considered out of turn. For regular examination > Avg. 18.7 months until a first Office Action. > Avg. 30.6 months total pendency. For Track One, > Avg. 1.6 months until a first Office Action. > Ave. 4.7 months from petition grant to allowance. 21

Prioritized Examination Requirements The Application must be a Utility or Plant Application AND Continuing Application (By-pass PCT, Divisional, Continuation, Continuation-in-Part (CIP), or Request for Continued Examination (RCE x 1)). Cannot be a 371 national stage application. To Prioritize, file a petition with the application. No more than 4 independent claims, no more than 30 total claims, no multiple dependent claims Electronically filed Fee of $4,000 (unless small or micro entity) Complete under 37 C.F.R. 1.51(b) (oath and dec.) 22

How To Lose Priority Status: In One Easy Step! An Prioritized Application Generally Remains Prioritized Until a Final Office Action or Notice of Allowance is Received. Unless: File a Petition for Extension of Time. Amend to more than 4 independent claims. Amend to more than 30 total claims. Amend a claim into multiple dependent format. 23

Pre-Issuance Submission of Prior Art in Applications Allows a Third-Party to file prior art in an application with a concise description of relevance. Timing: Later of 6 months after publication or before first rejection (i.e., first Office Action), and before allowance Any pending non-provisional Application. Must provide copies and English translations 24

Concise Description of Relevance Factual description of relevance for each document to each claim. No arguments, only descriptions. Claim Publication X Patent Y A composition comprising A + B + C. A mixture of A + B See, [0024] of X. Adding C improves a property. Col. 2, lines 1-3 of Y. 25

Supplemental Examination Allows for patent owners to submit documents for reexamination of the patent. Provides a way to avoid inequitable conduct by cleaning up the file wrapper. > Failure to submit material references in IDS > Erroneous statements > Lack of Statement of Substance of the Interview > What about payment of incorrect fees? 26

Supplemental Examination: How to Use It Can only be filed by all Patent Owner(s). Any time during enforceability, but will not help for if law suits is already filed (or notice sent) Must raise a substantial new question of patentability. Up to 12 items per Supplemental Examination $5,140 for request and $16,120, if granted. If granted, then Ex Parte Reexamination. Non-patent owners cannot intervene. 27

Micro Entity Status If qualify, can reduce many PTO fees by 75% There are two paths to Micro Entity Status: The Higher Education path requires: > 1. The applicant's employer, from which the applicant obtains the majority of the applicant's income, is a institution of higher education (U.S. or protectorate) OR > 2. The applicant has assigned, licensed, etc or is under obligation to assign interest to such a institution of higher education. See, 77 Fed. Reg. 75019 28

Micro Entity Status: the Narrow Path The Small Entity Path requires: qualifies as a small entity (i.e., individual, business with less than 500 employees, or non-profit); Not been named as an inventor on more than 4 previously filed patent applications; No gross annual income exceeding three times the median household income ($150,162 in 2011); and Not assigned, licensed, etc. to a party with gross income of more than three times the median household income. > See, 77 Fed. Reg. 75019 and 37 CFR 1.27. 29

Oaths and Declarations For Applications filed on or after September 16, 2013, follow AIA Declaration, Assignment, and Power of Attorney rules. http://www.uspto.gov/forms/index.jsp 30

Best Mode: It Just Won t Die [F]ailure to disclose the best mode shall not be a basis on which any claim of a patent may be canceled or held invalid or otherwise unenforceable. 35 U.S.C. 112(b)(3)(A) A practitioner shall disclose to the Office information necessary to comply with applicable duty of disclosure provisions. 37 C.F.R. 11.106(c) 31

Thank You William R. Childs, Ph.D. William.Childs@dbr.com 1500 K Street NW, Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20005 (202) 230-5140 (202) 842-8465 fax www.drinkerbiddle.com CALIFORNIA DELAWARE ILLINOIS NEW JERSEY NEW YORK PENNSYLVANIA WASHINGTON DC WISCONSIN 2011 Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP All rights reserved. A Delaware limited liability partnership 32