J. Gordon Thomson Professional Corporation Barrister, Solicitor & Notary Public (Ontario) Registered Patent Agent (Canada & USA) Registered Trade-mark.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Technology Center 1600 Training on Writing Rejections Under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
Advertisements

Managing Intellectual Property Assets in International Business Anil Sinha, Counsellor, SMEs Division World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO)
Disclaimer: The information provided by the USPTO is meant as an educational resource only and should not be construed as legal advice or written law.
Disclaimer: The information provided by the USPTO is meant as an educational resource only and should not be construed as legal advice or written law.
Disclaimer: The information provided by the USPTO is meant as an educational resource only and should not be construed as legal advice or written law.
Jordanian Patent Office Experience in Cooperating with WIPO in the field of Search & Examination Prepared by Presented by Dr. Lina Haddad Zain AL Awamleh.
Bio-Rad Patent Workshop “Patents from the Inside” James Robarts Excelsior Bonifico Company
Patent Mining for Freedom to Operate (FTO) Analysis Professor Stan Kowalski, Ph.D., J.D. February 24, 2009 Professor Stan Kowalski, Ph.D., J.D. February.
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY PROTECTION OFFICE OF PATENT COUNSEL March 16, 2001.
Intellectual Property (ref: Engineering by Design by Gerard Voland)
Industrial Property the Patent system
INTRODUCTION TO PATENT RIGHTS The Business of Intellectual Property
The America Invents Act (AIA) - Rules and Implications of First to File, Prior Art, and Non-obviousness -
Disclaimer: The information provided by the USPTO is meant as an educational resource only and should not be construed as legal advice or written law.
Determining Obviousness under 35 USC 103 in view of KSR International Co. v. Teleflex TC3600 Business Methods January 2008.
ISMT 520 Lecture #6: Protecting Technical and Business Process Innovations Dr. Theodore H. K. Clark Associate Professor and Academic Director of MSc Programs.
D ANIELS B AKER Introduction to Patent Law Doug Yerkeson University of Cincinnati Senior Design Class April 6, 2005.
by Eugene Li Summary of Part 3 – Chapters 8, 9, and 10
Intellectual Property Boston College Law School February 16, 2009 Patent – Novelty.
® ® From Invention to Start-Up Seminar Series University of Washington The Legal Side of Things Invention Protection Gary S. Kindness Christensen O’Connor.
Finding and Evaluating Inventions, Prior Art How to Find Inventions, How to Evaluate Inventions, Finding Prior Art.
Shaping Business Strategy Through Competitive Intelligence: strategic use of Intellectual Property Information Training of Trainer’s Program, Teheran 9.
STEPS TO SUCCESSFUL PRELIMINARY PATENT SEARCHING Karen M. Kitchens Patent and Trademark Resource Center Wyoming State.
Current and Future USPTO Practice RESTRICTION PRACTICES AT THE USPTO 1 © AIPLA 2015.
1 Basic Facts about Patents Chem 3380 Fall Patent Documents  Legal Document A patent is a legal right granted by a government to an inventor.
© 2010 Hodgson Russ LLP IEEE Southern Area Entrepreneur’s Day Overview Of The Patent Process R. Kent Roberts Hodgson Russ LLP (716)
Fundamentals of Patenting and Licensing for Scientists and Engineers Part 2: Fundamentals in Patenting Book by Matthew Ma Summarized by Constance Lu.
1 United States Patent and Trademark Office Revised PCT International Search and Preliminary Examination Guidelines Biotech/ChemPharm Customer Partnership.
Rodolphe Bauer, Frédéric Dedek, Gareth Jenkins, Cristina Margarido
PatentEng-Berkeley-Lavian Week 7: Anticipation and Obviousness 1 Patent Engineering IEOR 190G CET: Center for Entrepreneurship &Technology Week 7 Dr. Tal.
Wireless Mobile Devices Patents Dr. Tal Lavian UC Berkeley Engineering, CET Week 3.
PATENT SEARCH Patent Awareness Seminar, Mumbai Andreya Fernandes Gopakumar Nair Associates Url:
Chapter 25 Intellectual Property Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written.
Utility Requirement in Japan Makoto Ono, Ph.D. Anderson, Mori & Tomotsune Website:
Patent and Intellectual Property
Overview OTL Mission Inventor Responsibility Stanford Royalty Sharing Disclosure Form Patent View Inventor Agreements Patent.
Non-Patent Literature (NPL) in the Patent Prior-Art Search USPTO Patents Search Templates, WIPO Requirement & EPO Resources Connie Wu Engineering and Patent.
1 John Calvert Supervisory Patent Examiner
Technology Transfer Wyoming Research Products Center Tony Nevshemal, Kelly Lynn Haigler Cornish, Davona Douglass, Peter Timbers.
Professor Peng  Patent Act (2008) ◦ Promulgated in 1984 ◦ Amended in 1992, 2000, and 2008.
Page 1 IOP Genomics Workshop Patents and Patenting Biotech Inventions Annemieke Breukink, Ph.D. September 8th, 2009.
Patent Law Presented by: Walker & Mann, LLP Walker & Mann, LLP 9421 Haven Ave., Suite 200 Rancho Cucamonga, Ca Office.
How to do your own patent search
2011 Industry Sponsored Research Workshop INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY Michael Jaremchuk Associate Director CVIP Phone: FAX:
PatentEng-Berkeley-Lavian Week 6: Validity and Infringement 1 Patent Engineering IEOR 190G CET: Center for Entrepreneurship &Technology Week 6 Dr. Tal.
Intellectual property (IP): the basics IP: what’s in it for you?
Initial "Inventor" Interview (Practical Legal And Business Considerations) Greg Allen 3M Innovative Properties Company 1 August 26, 2010 AIPLA’s Practical.
Josiah Hernandez Patentability Requirements. Useful Having utilitarian or commercial value Novel No one else has done it before If someone has done it.
Varian Australia Pty Ltd – Some Patenting Issues David Carmichael 6 th May 2004.
New Sections 102 & 103 (b) Conditions for Patentability- (1) IN GENERAL- Section 102 of title 35, United States Code, is amended to read as follows: -`Sec.
Overview Validity of patent hinges on novelty, utility, and non-obviousness Utility generally not an issue Pre-suit investigation focuses on infringement,
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW FOR NON-IP PRACTITIONERS: ETHICS AND ISSUE SPOTTING FOR EFFECTIVE REPRESENTATION Philip Furgang Furgang & Adwar, L.L.P. New York,
Patent Searching Basics Patrick M. Torre, Ph.D. November 18, 2015.
Shaping Business Strategy Through Competitive Intelligence - Strategic Use of Intellectual Property Information – Topic 12 - Training of the Trainers Program.
© 2008 International Intellectual Property June 16, 2009 Class 2 Introduction to Patents.
Patent Process and Patent Search 6a Foundations of Technology Standard 3: Students will develop an understanding of the relationships among technologies.
WIPO Patent Search. DO I NEED A PATENT SEARCH ? A patent search is a good idea but it costs money upfront. Deciding whether to spend the money on a patent.
An introduction to Intellectual property protection TG © Copyright by Stevens Institute of Technology.
Technology Transfer Office
Intellectual Property Owner’s Manual
R.D.Sathish Kumar Principal Technical Officer
Options to Protect an Invention: the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) and Trade Secrets Hanoi October 24, 2017 Peter Willimott Senior Program Officer WIPO.
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY MANAGEMENT
Nuts and Bolts of Patent Law
Global Innovation Management Workout on Writing a Patent
Topic 7 Shaping Business Strategy Through Competitive Intelligence: strategic use of Intellectual Property Information Training of Trainer’s Program, Teheran.
Chapter 4: Patents and Trade Secrets in the Information Age.
What You Didn’t Know That You Didn’t Know About Patents
Presentation transcript:

J. Gordon Thomson Professional Corporation Barrister, Solicitor & Notary Public (Ontario) Registered Patent Agent (Canada & USA) Registered Trade-mark Agent (Canada & USA) 1353 Mountainside Crescent, Ottawa, Ontario K1E 3G5 Phone: Fax:

SEEK AND YE SHALL FIND (…but hopefully not!) Invention Disclosure Patentability Searches and Opinions

Is a search necessary?  There is no legal requirement to search the prior art prior to filing.  If you are intimately familiar with the field then a search is probably not necessary  If the invention is an improvement to a previously filed invention then a search is probably not necessary

Recommendations 1. You should make (or have made) a thorough patentability search before your decide to file a patent application 2. The patentability search should be done with the commercial evaluation

Reasons for a Search 1. Determine if a patent is reasonably achievable 2. Avoid wasting money on an application that may fail 3. Discover relevant prior art references that will make drafting easier 4.Discover prior art that will help you improve the invention

Reasons for a Search 5. To learn more about inventions that worked and attained commercial success 6. To distinguish your invention from the prior art 7.To determine the novel features of the invention 8.To present search results to potential investors and licensees

Reasons for a Search 9. Locate prior art that the Examiner might miss (Duty to disclose) 10. Determine potential infringement of in- force patents

WHO DOES THE SEARCH?  DIY – The inventor can usually do a good search but know when to stop  Searcher  Unlicensed  Located in CIPO or USPTO  Agent/Lawyer  Familiar with the legal requirements  Familiar with drafting  Familiar with you

SEARCH STRATEGIES  Where to search:  Canada – CIPO online database  USA – USPTO online database  Other countries? Budget  Delphion  Derwent  WIPO

SEARCH STRATEGIES  How to Search  By classification  By key word

Prerequisites for a Patent  Utility  Novelty  Inventive Step

UTILITY An invention must have some use. That is, it must have utility, be of some commercial or industrial value and be of some benefit to the public. The invention must also be practically fit for the purpose described in the invention and it must do what the inventor promised it would do. When patent claims are based on results that fail, a patent will not issue.

NOVELTY An invention must be new and novel, that is, never previously disclosed to the public. An invention is called “anticipated” if it has been previously disclosed in the prior art. The invention must be different than all other devices, considered individually, in the art to which the invention applies. This is a relatively objective test hence easier to apply than the obviousness test.

NOVELTY ANALYSIS Entire invention must be disclosed in a single piece of prior art NEW AAA BBBB CCCC DD

INVENTIVENESS An invention must be inventive. That is, it must be a step forward in the art of the field of the invention. An invention that lacks inventiveness is considered to be obvious and not patentable. An invention is inventive if it would not be obvious to a person “skilled in the art” of the field of the invention in view of all the available prior art at the time of the filing of the patent application. The prior art may be “mosaiced” together. This means several patents may be considered in any reasonable combination to determine if the invention would be obvious to a person skilled in the art. Mere workshop improvements to an existing invention are not considered to be inventive. The lack of inventiveness is fatal to patentability. This is a subjective test and a difficult one to satisfy during a patent examination.

OBVIOUSNESS ANALYSIS Prior art may be mosaiced Entire invention must be disclosed in a single piece of prior art NEW AAA BBBB CCCC DD

SEARCH REPORT/OPINION CONTENTS Introduction Summary Brief description of your invention Conclusions Limitations of this Search and Opinion Background What is the problem? How does your invention solve it?

SEARCH REPORT/OPINION CONTENTS Classification of the Invention Primary class description Sub-class description Search strategy Where Key words used Classes searched List of relevant prior art patents Copies included

SEARCH REPORT/OPINION CONTENTS The test for patentability Proper subject matter Usefulness Inventiveness/Obviousness Novelty/Anticipation Meeting formalities Discussion and analysis of prior art Conclusions Recommendations