Transcript

HOW WILL THE AMERICA INVENTS ACT (AIA) CHANGE THE WAY WE PROTECT AMERICAN

IMAGINEERING? Michael A. Guiliana

April 24, 2012Disney’s Grand Californian Hotel

2© 2012 Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear, LLP all rights reserved.

AIA Makes 3 Major Changes

1. “First-to-File”

2. Eliminates Interferences

3. Post Grant Oppositions

• Accelerate Patent Filing Process

• Segregate Patent Applications re March 16, 2013 Deadline

• Last Call for Interferences

• Revise Pre-Litigation Checklist with Post Grant PTO Options

• Consider Monitoring Policy

AIA Changes Consider…

3© 2012 Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear, LLP all rights reserved.

Patent Reform – what needed reforming?

What are YOUR thoughts?

4© 2012 Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear, LLP all rights reserved.

Kappos on Keeping Up With the Speed of Business

5© 2012 Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear, LLP all rights reserved.

Kappos on Litigation

6© 2012 Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear, LLP all rights reserved.

Is this what needed reform?!

7© 2012 Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear, LLP all rights reserved.

Patent Monetization Landscape – Key Players

8© 2012 Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear, LLP all rights reserved.

Patent Applications Under First-to-Invent

Inventor A InventsIDF

Decision to Draft and File Patent App. Filing Date

Committee Review of IDF• Searching• Market Analysis

Patent Filing Lag(Can Be Long)

USPTO Procedures

Inventor B InventsFiles Patent Fast

“Swear Behind”(37 CFR § 1.131)

-or-Interference

INVENTOR A WINS!

9© 2012 Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear, LLP all rights reserved.

Patent Applications Under First-to-FileStarting March 16, 2013

Inventor A InventsIDF

Decision to Draft and File Patent App. Filing Date

Committee Review of IDF• Searching• Market Analysis

USPTO Procedures

Inventor B InventsFiles Patent Fast

INVENTOR B WINS!

“Swear Behind”(37 CFR § 1.131)

-or-Interference

Patent Filing Lag(Can Be Long)

10© 2012 Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear, LLP all rights reserved.

Preparations for First-to-File System

Inventor A InventsIDF and:

• Files Patent App., or• Files Provisional App.

Decision to Draft and File Patent App. Filing Date

Committee Review of IDF• Searching• Market Analysis

USPTO Procedures

Inventor B InventsFiles Patent Fast

INVENTOR A WINS!

Patent Filing Lag(Can Be Long)

• Reduce Your Patent Lag•Provisional Applications - IDFs•Patent Application Training

11© 2012 Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear, LLP all rights reserved.

Preparations for First-to-File System

Reducing Patent Filing Lag / File First – Vet Later

• Train R&D Staff to Assist Writing Patent Applications

– File IDFs as Provisional Applications

• Segregate Unnecessary Information

– PTO Fee < $100

– 10 Months Available for:

• Searching

• Market Research

• Prototyping

• Foreign Filing Decisions

12© 2012 Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear, LLP all rights reserved.

Invention Tracking – Prior Use Defense

Prior Commercial Use is a Defense to ANY Patent Infringement

• Invention Disclosure Forms are Vehicle for Capturing Evidence

– Revise IDFs to include “Date of First Commercialization”

– Keep IDF Open Until DFC Established (even if no patent filing)

– Preserve All IDFs (even if no patent filing)

• Defense Potentially Available Even if Commercial Use of Invention is Trade Secret

13© 2012 Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear, LLP all rights reserved.

Simplified Product Marking

• 35 U.S.C. § 287(a) – Virtual Marking

– The word ‘patent’ or the abbreviation ‘pat.’ AND

– A website address “accessible to the public without charge”

• Must associate “the patented article with the number of the patent”

14© 2012 Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear, LLP all rights reserved.

Challenging Patent Applications in the PTO – New Reasons to Monitor

Challenging Pending Patent Applications

• “Third Party Submissions” 35 U.S.C. § 122(e)(2)

– TP Can Submit Patent/Published App., Printed Pub. +

– Argument

– Deadline – A Very Narrow Window:

• Before Allowance, AND

• Within 6 Months After Publication, or

• Before First Rejection

• Monitoring is the ONLY Way to Identify Opportunities

15© 2012 Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear, LLP all rights reserved.

Challenging Patents in the PTO – More Reasons to Monitor

Challenging Issued Patents

• Post Grant Review:

– Requester can use ANY Prior Art/Any Basis for Invalidity

• (except failure to disclose Best Mode)

– Deadline:

• 9 Months from Issuance

• Monitoring Only Practical Way to Identify Opportunities

– Appealable/Estoppel

16© 2012 Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear, LLP all rights reserved.

Challenging Patents in the PTO – More Reasons to Monitor

Challenging Issued Patents

• Inter Partes Review:

– Prior Art Limited to Printed Publications/Patents

– At Least 9 Months After Issuance/After Post Grant Review

– Appealable + Estoppel

17© 2012 Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear, LLP all rights reserved.

Best Mode Requirement – Dead?

• Disclosure of Best Mode Still Required 35 U.S.C. § 112, 1st

• Failure to Disclose Best Mode No Longer Grounds for Invalidity

– 35 U.S.C. 282

• Not Clear if Duty of Candor to the PTO will Have Any Effect

– Patent Attorney Subject to OED

– Possibly No Recourse Against Inventor or Patent Owner¶

©2012 Knobbe Martens, Olson & Bear, LLP all rights reserved.©2012 Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear, LLP all rights reserved.

18

Thank You!

Michael A. Guiliana [email protected]


Top Related