P ROFESSOR R UTH O KEDIJI First to File Patent Systems How the New U.S. System Compares to other Systems Around the World

What is a First to File System? Simple and Efficient Clear Rights Innovation Rights Granted to First Filer, not First Inventor Image from:

Why have a First to File System? Innovation Disclosed Faster Makes Rights Clearer Encourages Quick and Frequent Filing Downsides Concerns regarding Small Businesses Blocking Patents The AIA requires a report from the SBA on the effects on small business of eliminating dates of invention in patent applications.

The Old U.S. System: First-to-Invent United States: The Last Hold Out First-to-Invent: Earliest Inventor gets the Patent Interference Procedures Grace Period Proof Issues

Congressional Goals for the AIA Two Major Goals for First-Inventor-to-File Provision (1) Inventor Certainty in Rights (2) International Patent Harmonization

The New System: First-Inventor-to-File Patent Reform Enacted: September 16, 2011 First-Inventor -to-File Provisions Effective: March 16, 2013 While there will no longer be interference proceedings available, the AIA still ensures that only actual inventors are eligible to file an application through derivation proceedings – which look to determine whether an earlier filing derived the invention from the later-filing actual inventor. Key Changes First-Inventor-to-File Removal of Interference Proceedings Derivation Proceedings Grace Period Retained Image From: affects-inventors/

AIA: First-Inventor-to-File 35 U.S.C. § 100(i)(1) The term effective filing date for a claimed invention in a patent or application for patent means: (A) … the actual filing date of the patent or application for the patent containing a claim to the invention; or (B) the filing date of the earliest application for which the patent or application is entitled, as to such invention, to a right of priority…

Priority Dates and Previous Filings 35 U.S.C. § 119 (a) A patent application filed by a foreign filer in US by any person who has filed a patent application for the same invention in the filers own country will have the same privileges as an application originally filed in the United States if that country affords similar privileges to patent applications originally filed in the United States. (e) A patent application filed for an invention disclosed in a previously filed provisional patent application shall have the same effect as if it was filed on the date of the provisional application. Section (e) also makes the best mode disclosure requirement optional instead of mandatory.

Grace Period 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)(1) A disclosure made 1 year or less before the effective filing date of a claimed invention shall not be prior art to the claimed invention if: (A): The disclosure was made by the inventor or joint inventor or (B): The subject matter disclosed had, before such disclosure, been publicly disclosed by the inventor or a joint inventor.

Derivation Proceedings 35 U.S.C. § 135(a) An applicant for patent may file a petition to institute a derivation proceeding in the Office. The petition shall set forth with particularity the basis for finding that an inventor named in an earlier application derived the claimed invention from an inventor named in the petitioners application and, without authorization, the earlier application claiming such invention was filed. Must Request Within 1 Year of Publication USPTO Director Decides to Institute

Comparing the AIA with Other First-to-File Systems Europe: EPC Germany United Kingdom Asia Korea Japan Image from: content/uploads/2011/01/applesoranges.jpg

The German System Section 6: If two or more persons made an invention independently of each other, the right shall belong to the person who is the first to file an application with the Patent Office. First to File Model System for Europe Competitive Edge Limited Grace Period Art. 55 of the EPC: Six month grace period if: (a): an evident abuse in relation to the applicant or his legal predecessor, or (b): the fact that the applicant or his legal predecessor has displayed the invention at an official, or officially recognized, international exhibition falling within the terms of the Convention on international exhibitions signed at Paris on 22 November 1928 and last revised on 30 November 1972.

The UK System The true and first inventor is not necessarily the first discoverer of the invention. If it had been discovered by another, but the discovery had never been divulged, he who independently discovers the same thing, and is the first to disclose it or to apply for a patent, which is eventually granted, is the true and first inventor. - Edmunds on Patents, 2ed, True and First Inventor System Patent Rights Tied to Disclosure Patent Application Satisfies Disclosure Same Day Applicants Proceed Independently EPC Part C, Chapter IV-24, Section 7.4: Should two applications of the same effective date be received from two different applicants, each must be allowed to proceed as though the other did not exist. Limited Grace Period Art. 55 EPC

The Japanese System Article 39(1): Where two or more patent applications relating to the same invention are filed on different dates, only the first applicant may obtain a patent for the invention Japanese First-To-File System First Applicant Gets Rights Same Day Applicants Must Agree on Rights Examination on Request Only 6 Month Grace Period Limited Disclosure

The Korean System Article 36(1) Where two or more applications relating to the same invention are filed on different dates, only the applicant filing the application having the earlier filing date may obtain a patent for the invention. First to File System Goal of Korean Patent Act: Promote Industrial Advancement Later Filers Barred Limited Grace Period Six months

Global Patent Law Harmonization Main Areas of Disagreement First to File Prior Art Treatment Prosecution/Litigation Differences Grace Period Image From: