1 Charts of: The Four Time Periods for Submitting an IDS and Their Corresponding Requirements “Changes to Information Disclosure Statement Requirements.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
AIA Final Rules Submission of Certified Foreign Priority Documents and Translations Under the AIA March 20, 2013.
Advertisements

First Action Interview Pilot Program Overview. Pilot Program Objectives Promote personal interviews prior to issuance of a first Office action on the.
Incorporation by Reference
Michael Neas Supervisor Office of PCT Legal Administration
Accelerating Patent Prosecution Thursday, October 18, 2012.
Anatomy of a Patent Application Presented by: Jeong Oh Director, Office of Technology Transfer & Industrial Development Syracuse University April 30, 2009.
Joint Meeting of PIPLA and NJIPLA February 7, 2012 Kenneth N. Nigon RatnerPrestia 1.
Implementing First-Inventor-to-File Provisions of the AIA By: Scott D. Malpede, Seth Boeshore and Chitra Kalyanaraman USPTO Rules Effective March 16, 2013.
Responding to Record Requests. TYPE OF REQUEST Public Information Act (PIA) Request otherwise known as an Open Records Request Inactive Student Record.
Copyright Greenblum & Bernstein, P.L.C 1 Ken Moore Proposed New Rules in US Patent and Trademark Office, and Related Prosecution/Negotiation/Litigation.
1 1 1 AIPLA American Intellectual Property Law Association USPTO Updates Including Glossary Pilot Program Chris Fildes Fildes & Outland, P.C. IP Practice.
1 1 AIPLA American Intellectual Property Law Association RCE Practice: Pilot Programs and Delays in Examination Chris Fildes Fildes & Outland, P.C. IP.
The America Invents Act (AIA) - Rules and Implications of First to File, Prior Art, and Non-obviousness -
September 14, U.S.C. 103(c) as Amended by the Cooperative Research and Technology Enhancement (CREATE) Act (Public Law ) Enacted December.
Robert M. Hansen The Marbury Law Group PLLC AIPLA Practical Patent Prosecution Training for New Lawyers August 2009Alexandria, VA Issuance, Term, Certificates.
Speeding It Up at the USPTO July 2013 July 23, 2013.
Filing Compliant Reexam Requests Andy Kashnikow SPE, Central Reexamination Unit Andy Kashnikow SPE, Central Reexamination Unit June, 2010.
Community Patent Robert Clarke – Deputy Director Office of Patent Legal Administration
Preissuance Submissions Under the America Invents Act Janet Gongola Patent Reform Coordinator Direct dial:
Prosecution Group Luncheon Patents August Proposed First-To-File Rules Add definitions in AIA to Rules Declarations for removing references based.
1 Implementation of the American Inventors Protection Act of 1999 (Public Law ) and the Patent Business Goals Hiram H. Bernstein Senior Legal Advisor.
July 8, Enhanced Examination Timing Control Robert A. Clarke Deputy Director Office of Patent Legal Administration
Accelerated Examination Bennett Celsa (TC 1600: QAS)
Patent Term Adjustment (Bio/Chem. Partnership) Kery Fries, Sr. Legal Advisor Phone: (571)
by Eugene Li Summary of Part 3 – Chapters 8, 9, and 10
Appeal Practice Refresher Office of Patent Training.
1 Patent Term Extension under 35 U.S.C. § 156 Mary C. Till Legal Advisor Office of Patent Legal Administration.
Full First Action Interview (FFAI) Pilot Program Wendy Garber Tech Center Director, 2100 United States Patent & Trademark Office.
July 18, Changes to Patent Fees Under the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2005 (H.R. 4818/P.L ) Topic: Patent Fees Office of Patent Legal.
Patent Rule and Procedural Changes The Patent Office Comes to California June 4 and 5, 2007 Joni Y. Chang Senior Legal Advisor Office of Patent Legal Administration.
September 14, Final Rule Making on Practice Before the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (BPAI) Robert Spar Director of the Office of Patent.
Information Disclosure Statements
December 8, Changes to Patent Fees Under the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2005 (H.R. 4818)(upon enactment) and 35 U.S.C. 103(c) as Amended by.
February 19, Recent Changes and Developments in USPTO Practice Prepared by: Office of Patent Legal Administration (OPLA) Robert J. Spar, DirectorJoni.
Contents of US Patent Applications & Filing Requirements
Accelerated Examination Program Andrew Faile Director, TC 2600.
Remy Yucel Director, CRU (571) Central Reexamination Unit and the AIA.
1 John Calvert Supervisory Patent Examiner
1 1 AIPLA Firm Logo American Intellectual Property Law Association Update regarding PCT and PPH at the USPTO Yuichi Watanabe Joint Meeting of AIPLA and.
July 18, U.S.C. 103(c) as Amended by the Cooperative Research and Technology Enhancement (CREATE) Act (Public Law ) Enacted December 10,
Post-Grant & Inter Partes Review Procedures Presented to AIPPI, Italy February 10, 2012 By Joerg-Uwe Szipl Griffin & Szipl, P.C.
Charter School 2015 Annual Finance Seminar Grant Management Office of Grants Fiscal September 11, 2015.
Grant Management Guidelines Grant Management Guidelines.
BEIJING BRUSSELS CHICAGO DALLAS FRANKFURT GENEVA HONG KONG LONDON LOS ANGELES NEW YORK SAN FRANCISCO SHANGHAI SINGAPORE SYDNEY TOKYO WASHINGTON, D.C. Patent.
1 Rules of Practice Before the BPAI in Ex Parte Appeals 73 Fed. Reg (June 10, 2008) Effective December 10, Fed. Reg (June 10, 2008)
Patent Prosecution Luncheon February Defective Priority Claim Means No Priority Claim Each intermediate application in the chain of priority must.
Reexamination at the USPTO Robert A. Clarke Deputy Director Office of Patent Legal Administration USPTO Robert A. Clarke Deputy Director Office of Patent.
Claims and Continuations Final Rule Overview Briefing for Examiners 1.
3 rd Party Participation Bennett Celsa TC 1600 QAS.
1 IDS NPR Changes to Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Requirements Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPR) 71 FR (2006) XX Off. Gaz. YY (2006)
Claims and Continuations Final Rule 1 Joni Y. Chang Senior Legal Advisor Office of Patent Legal Administration (571) ,
1 1 AIPLA Firm Logo American Intellectual Property Law Association Imminent Changes to the US Patent Law Pre-Grant Patent Practice Under the AIA Alan J.
Chris Fildes FILDES & OUTLAND, P.C. IP Practice in Japan Committee Pre-Meeting AIPLA Annual Meeting, October 20, 2015 USPTO PILOT PROGRAMS 1 © AIPLA 2015.
Prosecution Luncheon Patent October PDF’s Now Available on USPTO Website.
Patent Fee Proposal Patent Public Advisory Committee Hearing November 19, 2015.
Claims Proposed Rulemaking Main Purposes É Applicant Assistance to Improve Focus of Examination n Narrow scope of initial examination so the examiner is.
1 USPTO Examination Related Initiatives Bob Spar Director, Office of Patent Legal Administration Deputy Commissioner for Patent Examination Policy Maryland.
Andrew B. Freistein Wenderoth, Lind & Ponack, L.L.P. Learning the ABC’s of Patent Term Adjustment 1 © AIPLA 2015.
January 25, Notice of Proposed Rule Making Proposed Changes to Practice for Continuing Applications, Requests for Continued Examination Practice,
Report to the AIPLA’s IP Practice in Japan Committee January 22, 2012 USPTO Appeal Process: Appeal Strategies and New Rules Presented by: Stephen S. Wentsler.
1 USPTO Examination Related Initiatives Bob Spar Director, Office of Patent Legal Administration Deputy Commissioner for Patent Examination Policy American.
NA, Yanghee International Application Team Korean Intellectual Property Office National Phase of PCT international applications April 26,
USPTO Rule Changes to Focus the Patent Process in the 21st Century
PATENT OFFICE PROSECUTION
Pre-Issuance (Third-Party) Submissions
Claims and Continuations Final Rule
USPTO Appeal Process: Appeal Strategies and New Rules
PATENT LAW TREATY Gena Jones Senior Legal Advisor
Budget Realignments and Budget Amendments
Third Party Pre-Issuance Submissions Under AIA
Presentation transcript:

1 Charts of: The Four Time Periods for Submitting an IDS and Their Corresponding Requirements “Changes to Information Disclosure Statement Requirements and Other Related Matters” 71 Fed. Reg (July 10, 2006) Notice of Proposed Rulemaking; XX Off. Gaz. Pat. Office YY (August 1, 2006)

2 Time Period 1: IDS Submission Requirements Time Period: 1 Requirements for Submission of IDS in time period 1 (§ 1.98(a)(3)(i)(A)-(C))Exceptions to requirements Starts - upon filing of application Ends - later of {3 months after filing, or 1st Office action} (§ 1.97(b)(1)-(3)) A.General rule: IDSs filed during this time period may be submitted without triggering an “explanation” requirement. B.An “explanation” is required for each of the following (§ 1.98(a)(3)(iv)): 1. Any English-language document over 25 pages (excluding sequence & computer listings); 2. Any non-English language document and any submitted translation (See D. below) if the translation exceeds 25 pages (§ 1.98(a)(3)(xi)); and 3. ALL documents when their cumulative number exceeds 20 in all IDSs filed in this time period. An “explanation” requires identification of the specific feature(s), showing(s), or teaching(s) that caused the document to be cited, and a portion(s) of the document where the specific feature(s), showing(s), or teaching(s) may be found; and correlation of the specific feature(s), showing(s), or teaching(s) to corresponding specific claim language, or to a specific portion(s) of the supporting specification, where the document is cited for that purpose. C.Update of previously filed “explanations” (§ 1.98(a)(3)(ix)): With each amendment to the claims or the specification affecting the scope of the claims filed after an information disclosure statement, applicant must either: 1. Update each “explanation” for all previous information disclosure statements, where necessary, in view of the amendment(s); or 2. Submit a statement to the effect that updating of the previous explanation(s) submitted with information disclosure statement(s) is not needed. (continued) Documents resulting from a foreign search or examination report in a counterpart foreign application where the report is submitted. (§1.98(a)(3)(viii)(A)) Documents submitted in reply to a requirement for information (§ 1.105) (§1.98(a)(3)(viii)(C)). The certification of § 1.97(e) is not required, hence the three month time frame is not a requirement.

3 Time Period 1: IDS Submission Requirements (cont’d) Time Period: 1 Requirements for Submission of IDS in time period 1 (§ 1.98(a)(3)(i)(A)-(C))Exceptions to requirements D.Where a non-English language document is submitted, any translation within the possession, custody, or control of, or that is readily available to a § 1.56(c) individual shall be filed (§ 1.98(a)(3)(xi)).

4 Time Period 2: IDS Submission Requirements Time Period: 2 Requirements for Submission of IDS in time period 2 (§ 1.98(a)(3)(ii))Exceptions to requirements Starts - at end of Period 1 Ends - {Notice of Allowance, or a NIRC in a reexamination proceeding} (§ 1.97(c)) The following apply to documents cited during this time period regardless of page length or the number of previously cited documents: A.An “explanation” for each cited document (see time period 1). B.A “non-cumulative description” for each cited document (§ 1.98(a)(3)(v)). A “non-cumulative description” is a description how each document is not merely cumulative of any other document cited in any prior or current IDS, or any information cited by the examiner. C.Update of previously filed “explanations” (see time period 1): D.Where a non-English language document is submitted, any translation within the possession, custody, or control of, or that is readily available to a § 1.56(c) individual shall be filed (§ 1.98(a)(3)(xi)). Documents filed with a 37 CFR 1.97(e)(1) timeliness certification and a copy of the foreign search or examination report for a counterpart foreign application. (§ 1.98(a)(3)(viii)(B)) Documents filed in response to a requirement for information (§ 1.105) (§ 1.98(a)(3)(viii)(C)).

5 Time Period 3: IDS Submission Requirements Time Period: 3 Requirements for Submission of IDS in time period 3 (§ 1.98(a)(3)(iii))Exceptions to requirements Starts - at end of Time Period 2 Ends - at payment of issue fee (§ 1.97(d)(1)) The following apply to documents cited during this time period regardless of page length or the number of previously cited documents: A.A timeliness “certification” per § 1.97(e)(1) or (e)(2) to certify: 1. That each item of information contained in the information disclosure statement was first cited in any communication from a foreign patent office in a counterpart foreign application not more than three months prior to the filing of the information disclosure statement (§ 1.97(e)(1)); or 2. That no item of information contained in the information disclosure statement was cited in a communication from a foreign patent office in a counterpart foreign application, and, to the knowledge of the person signing the certification after making reasonable inquiry, no item of information contained in the information disclosure statement was known to any individual designated in § 1.56(c) more than three months prior to the filing of the information disclosure statement (§ 1.97(e)(2)). B.One of the “patentability justifications” defined in § 1.98(a)(3)(vi)(A) or (B). Each “patentability justification” requires an “explanation” (see time period 1), a “non-cumulative description” (see time period 2), and either: 1. Where a § 1.98(a)(3)(vi)(A) patentability justification is chosen: Reasons why the independent claims are patentable over the information in the IDS being submitted, considered together, and in view of any information already of record; or (continued) The requirements of this time period do not apply to reexamination proceedings as there is no issue fee payment.

6 Time Period 3: IDS Submission Requirements (cont’d) Time Period: 3 Requirements for Submission of IDS in time period 3 (§ 1.98(a)(3)(iii))Exceptions to requirements 2. Where the § 1.98(a)(3)(vi)(B) “patentability justification” is chosen: a. Reasons why the amendment causes claims, admitted to be unpatentable over the information submitted in the IDS, to be patentable over such information when considered together, and in view of any information already of record, b. An unequivocal statement that one or more claims are “unpatentable” in view of at least the cited information, and c. An amendment to the claims admitted to be “unpatentable” in the unequivocal statement. C.Where a non-English language document is submitted, any translation within the possession, custody, or control of, or that is readily available to a § 1.56(c) individual shall be filed (§ 1.98(a)(3)(xi)). D.Update of previously filed “explanations” (see time period 1).

7 Time Period 4: IDS Submission Requirements Time Period: 4 Requirements for Submission of IDS in time period 4 (§ 1.98(a)(3)(iii))Exceptions to requirements Starts - at {payment of issue fee, or mailing of NIRC in reexamination proceeding} Ends – {lack of sufficient time for the examiner to consider the IDS prior to issuance} (§ 1.97(d)(2)) The following apply to documents cited during this time period regardless of page length or the number of previously cited documents: A.A timeliness “certification” per § 1.97(e)(1) or (e)(2) (see time period 3), B.A petition to withdraw an application from issue (§ 1.313(c)(1)), or a reexamination proceeding from publication (§ 1.98(a)(3)(iii)(B)), and C.The “patentability justification” defined in § 1.98(a)(3)(vi)(B) (see time period 3). F.Where a non-English language document is submitted, any translation within the possession, custody, or control of, or that is readily available to a § 1.56(c) individual shall be filed (§ 1.98(a)(3)(xi)). G.Update of previously filed “explanations” (see time period 1).

8 Reasonable Inquiry Required for Each IDS Submission The reasonable inquiry mandated by §§ 10.18(b)(2) and 10.18(b)(2)(i) requires that information in any IDS submitted during any of time periods 1-4 be reviewed before submission to the Office to assure that it will not: (1) Cause unnecessary delay or needlessly increase the cost of examination, or (2) Result in the obscuring of material information.

9 More Information The below listed documents may be accessed via the “ More Information ” hyperlink associated with the Notice ’ s title at the following USPTO webpage: –Executive Summary – IDS NPR, –Detailed Summary – IDS NPR, –Slide set – IDS NPR, and –Application Prosecution Timeline. For more information, please contact the Office of Patent Legal Administration at (571) or to or contact one of the following: –Hiram Bernstein –Brian Hanlon –Robert J. Spar