1 LAW DIVISION PATENT DIVISION TRADEMARK & DESIGN DIVISION ACCOUNTING & AUDITING DIVISION YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1 Practical Impact of Recent PCT Changes on US Practice Maria Eliseeva Houston Eliseeva LLP American Intellectual Property Law Association October 15,
Advertisements

EPO RULE CHANGES 2010 Nicholas Fox. EPO Rule Changes Changes in search procedures Changes to divisional practice Changes to examination procedure.
1 Rule 132 Declarations and Unexpected Results Richard E. Schafer Administrative Patent Judge Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences.
1 1 1 AIPLA American Intellectual Property Law Association USPTO Updates Including Glossary Pilot Program Chris Fildes Fildes & Outland, P.C. IP Practice.
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.
Filing Compliant Reexam Requests Andy Kashnikow SPE, Central Reexamination Unit Andy Kashnikow SPE, Central Reexamination Unit June, 2010.
TC1600 Appeals Practice Jean Witz, Appeals Specialist.
Invention Spotting – Identifying Patentable Inventions Martin Vinsome June 2012.
JPO’s Reliance on Experimental Results in Patent Applications -From the Aspect of Requirements for Description of Claims and Specification- JPAA International.
JPO Updates JPAA International Activities Center Fujiko Shibata AIPLA Mid-Winter Institute IP Practice in Japan Committee Pre-Meeting Seminar.
1 Remedies for True Owner of Right to Obtain Patent against Usurped Patent AIPLA MWI IP Practice in Japan Committee Pre-Meeting Sunday, January 22, 2012.
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
® ® From Invention to Start-Up Seminar Series University of Washington The Legal Side of Things Invention Protection Gary S. Kindness Christensen O’Connor.
Information Disclosure Statements
PCT Search & Publication. PCT Timetable Months from Earliest Priority DateDeadline/Action 16 th MonthInternational Searching Authority (ISA) Prepares.
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.
Utility Requirement in Japan Makoto Ono, Ph.D. Anderson, Mori & Tomotsune Website:
2 23,503 hours in FY 2013, compared with 21,273 hours in FY ,651 interview hours in FY 13 have been charged through the AFCP program. Interview.
Biotechnology Assignment 7 Patent Law. Case study 1 –Federal Supreme Court Germany (Bundesgerichshof), 27 March 1969 (Red Dove), IIC, 1970, 136 –Answer.
Patents- Practical Aspects of International Patent Procurement/Prosecution June 2015 Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) Practice Overview.
European Patent Applicants Filing in China Common Mistakes Zheng Li Zhongzi Law Office September, 2014.
Investing in research, making a difference. Patent Basics for UW Researchers Leah Haman Intellectual Property Associate WARF 1.
Christopher J. Fildes Fildes & Outland, P.C. Derivation Proceedings and Prior User Rights.
2011 Japanese Patent Law Revision AIPLA Annual Meeting October 21, 2011 Yoshi Inaba TMI Associates.
1 1 AIPLA Firm Logo American Intellectual Property Law Association EMERGING TRENDS IN INTER PARTES REVIEW PRACTICE TOM ENGELLENNER Pepper Hamilton, LLP.
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.
Appeals in patent examination and opposition in Germany Karin Friehe Judge, Federal Patent Court, Munich, Germany.
Yoshiki KITANO JPAA International Activities Center AIPLA Annual Meeting, 2014 IP Practice in Japan Committee Pre-Meeting Seminar Post-Grant Opposition.
Utilizing The Madrid Protocol Todd S. Bontemps, Esq. Cooley Godward LLP Christian Larsen Cooley Godward LLP Legal Texts regarding the Madrid System:
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)
Post Grant Review to be introduced in Japan JPAA International Activities Center Fujiko Shibata January 29, 2013 AIPLA Mid-Winter Institute IP Practice.
UNT Technology Transfer Process For additional details see the UNT Intellectual Property Policy UNT retains ownership of the technology Intellectual.
1 1 AIPLA American Intellectual Property Law Association Updates on the USPTO Chris Fildes AIPLA-JPAA Joint Meeting April 9, 2013.
New Practice of Unity of Invention (Article 37) "Unity of Invention" and "Shift Amendments" under the Revised Examination Guidelines in Japan JPAA International.
New Ex Parte Appeal Rules Patent and Trademark Practice Group Meeting January 26, 2012.
Revisions to Japanese Patent Law Before the law was revised, a Divisional Applications could not be filed after a Notice of Allowance 2.
IP PRACTICE IN JAPAN PREMEETING AIPLA Mid-Winter Institute Las Vegas, NV January 22-23, 2012 Shigeyuki Nagaoka, JPAA.
FY09 Restriction Petition Update; Comparison of US and National Stage Restriction Practice Julie Burke TC1600 Quality Assurance Specialist
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.
James Toupin – General Counsel February 1, Summary of Proposed Rule Changes to Continuations, Double Patenting, and Claims.
Takeo Nasu JPAA International Activities Center AIPLA 2015 Mid-Winter Institute IP Practice in Japan Committee Pre-Meeting Seminar Updates of Post Grant.
JPO’s Initiatives for World‘s Best Examination Quality January, 2015 JAPAN PATENT OFFICE.
1 Patent Claim Interpretation under Art. 69 EPC – Should prosecution history be used to interpret the patent? presented at Fordham 19th Annual Conference.
Update on IP High Court -Trend of Determination on Inventive Step in IP High Court in comparison with the JPO- JPAA International Activities Center Toshifumi.
2007 Revisions to Japanese Patent Law. 2 #1 Period for Filing Divisional Applications (A) BeforeBefore AfterAfter Notice of Allowance Divisional Application.
Trends Relating to Patent Infringement Litigation in JAPAN
Andrew B. Freistein Wenderoth, Lind & Ponack, L.L.P. Learning the ABC’s of Patent Term Adjustment 1 © AIPLA 2015.
Double Patenting Deborah Reynolds SPE Art Unit 1632 Detailee, TC1600 Practice Specialist
CHAPTER 13: THE ORDER AND BEYOND Emond Montgomery Publications 1.
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.
Inventive Step in Japan and my personal reflection Dr. Shoichi Okuyama Okuyama & Sasajima AIPPI Japan January 2015 Orlando, Florida 1.
Accelerated Patent Examination: Green Technology A Summary of Global Initiatives, with specific discussion of the US Speaker: Matt Prater Preparation help.
NA, Yanghee International Application Team Korean Intellectual Property Office National Phase of PCT international applications April 26,
1 TOPIC III - PATENT INVALIDATION PROCEDURES EU-CHINA WORKSHOP ON THE CHINESE PATENT LAW HARBIN, SEPTEMBER 2008 Dr. Gillian Davies.
Current Situation of JP Patent based on Statistics (from view point of attacking pending and granted patents) Nobuo Sekine Japan Patent Attorneys Association.
Patents Amy Bilton Knowledge Transfer Officer.
PATC Module 2 – Infringement/Validity
USPTO Appeal Process: Appeal Strategies and New Rules
Accelerating your Patent Prosecution in Mexico
PATENT LAW TREATY Gena Jones Senior Legal Advisor
LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING
PATC Module 2 – Infringement/Validity
Upcoming changes in the European Patent Office practice on allowing claim amendments in pending patent applications (Article 123(2) EPC) Christof Keussen.
Appeal Code Changes Delynn Coldiron, City Clerk; Brad Yatabe, Legal
The Other 66 Percent: Appeals Before the PTAB
Presentation transcript:

1 LAW DIVISION PATENT DIVISION TRADEMARK & DESIGN DIVISION ACCOUNTING & AUDITING DIVISION YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING Pre-meeting of American Intellectual Property Law Association Mid-Winter Institute January , 2004 at La Quinta, California, U. S. A. Revision of Examination Guidelines Regarding Amendments Kazuaki Okimoto Patent Attorney YUASA and HARA

2 LAW DIVISION PATENT DIVISION TRADEMARK & DESIGN DIVISION ACCOUNTING & AUDITING DIVISION YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING Summary of revision of Examination Guidelines 1. Scope of Amendment The Japanese Patent Office (JPO) may allow amendment of claims, description or drawings based on “a matter which is inherently presented in the description, the claims or drawings originally attached to the request” in applying revised Examination Guidelines. Under the old Examination Guidelines, the scope for amendment at this stage is severely restricted. Any amendment must be clearly and unambiguously supported by the specification. In the subject case, the base text is the specification as of the filing date. Kazuaki Okimoto mail to:

3 LAW DIVISION PATENT DIVISION TRADEMARK & DESIGN DIVISION ACCOUNTING & AUDITING DIVISION YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING Summary of revision of Examination Guidelines 2. Lawful amendments The JPO may allow amendment of claims having generic concept or more specific concept by a total review of the amendment alongside the embodiments separately described in the description, the claims or drawings originally attached to the request and the other matters, for example, the problem to be solved by the invention. Kazuaki Okimoto mail to:

4 LAW DIVISION PATENT DIVISION TRADEMARK & DESIGN DIVISION ACCOUNTING & AUDITING DIVISION YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING Kazuaki Okimoto mail to: Basic concept of Revision of Examination Guidelines (1) An amendment which goes beyond “a matter presented in the description, the claims or drawings originally attached to the request”, including a new matter, is not allowed.

5 LAW DIVISION PATENT DIVISION TRADEMARK & DESIGN DIVISION ACCOUNTING & AUDITING DIVISION YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING Kazuaki Okimoto mail to: Basic concept of Revision of Examination Guidelines (2) “A matter presented in the description, the claims or drawings originally attached to the request” includes “a matter which is expressly presented in the description, the claims or drawings originally attached to the request” as well as “a matter which is inherently presented in the description, the claims or drawings originally attached to the request”.

6 LAW DIVISION PATENT DIVISION TRADEMARK & DESIGN DIVISION ACCOUNTING & AUDITING DIVISION YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING Kazuaki Okimoto mail to: Basic concept of Revision of Examination Guidelines (3) To meet the requirement “a matter which is inherent in the description, the claims or drawings originally attached to the request”, the matter amended must be such that those skilled in the art would be able to infer from the description, the claims or the drawings of the specification in view of common general technical knowledge even when the matter is not presented in the description, the claims or drawings.

7 LAW DIVISION PATENT DIVISION TRADEMARK & DESIGN DIVISION ACCOUNTING & AUDITING DIVISION YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING Kazuaki Okimoto mail to: Basic concept of Revision of Examination Guidelines (4) A matter which is intended to amend to the specification as a well-known art or commonly used art must also be the matter which those skilled in the art would understand as presented in the description, the claims or drawings specification in view of common general technical knowledge even when the matter is not presented in the description, the claims or drawings.

8 LAW DIVISION PATENT DIVISION TRADEMARK & DESIGN DIVISION ACCOUNTING & AUDITING DIVISION YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING Kazuaki Okimoto mail to: Basic concept of Revision of Examination Guidelines (5) It is admissible to assert a matter as inherently presented in the description, the claims or drawings from the plural parts of descriptions originally attached to the request.

9 LAW DIVISION PATENT DIVISION TRADEMARK & DESIGN DIVISION ACCOUNTING & AUDITING DIVISION YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING Kazuaki Okimoto mail to: Amendment with generic concept or more specific concept The following amendments are recognized to be matters presented in the description, the claims or drawings originally attached to the request.

10 LAW DIVISION PATENT DIVISION TRADEMARK & DESIGN DIVISION ACCOUNTING & AUDITING DIVISION YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING Kazuaki Okimoto mail to: Amendment with generic concept or more specific concept Case 1: Even if the invention is amended to delete a part of the specific matter defining the invention and to give the invention generic concept, it is apparent that it does not introduce a new technical meaning. It is recognized that a matter deleted is inherently added to the claims from the description, the claims or drawings originally attached to the request.

11 LAW DIVISION PATENT DIVISION TRADEMARK & DESIGN DIVISION ACCOUNTING & AUDITING DIVISION YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING Kazuaki Okimoto mail to: Amendment with generic concept or more specific concept Case 2: It is recognized that the invention having a specific matter defined by the amended claims is presented in the description, the claims or drawings, when reviewing totally the amendment alongside the embodiments separately described in the description, the claims or drawings originally attached to the request and other matters, for example, the problem to be solved by the invention.

12 LAW DIVISION PATENT DIVISION TRADEMARK & DESIGN DIVISION ACCOUNTING & AUDITING DIVISION YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING Kazuaki Okimoto mail to: Applicable patent applications This revised Examination Guidelines will be applied to patent applications filed on or after January 1, 1998.

13 LAW DIVISION PATENT DIVISION TRADEMARK & DESIGN DIVISION ACCOUNTING & AUDITING DIVISION YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING Kazuaki Okimoto mail to: Expecting amendments allowable Amendment of claims with generic concept or more specific concept Amendment by deleting a group selected from Markush type claim Amendments with numerical limitation Amendments by disclaimer.

14 LAW DIVISION PATENT DIVISION TRADEMARK & DESIGN DIVISION ACCOUNTING & AUDITING DIVISION YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING Kazuaki Okimoto mail to: Expecting amendments allowable The JPO provides some examples of amendment on its web site. All examples allowed are amendments which are made within “a matter presented in the description, the claims or drawings originally attached to the request”.

15 LAW DIVISION PATENT DIVISION TRADEMARK & DESIGN DIVISION ACCOUNTING & AUDITING DIVISION YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING Kazuaki Okimoto mail to: Expecting amendments allowable Whether the amended matter is recognized to be within “a matter presented in the description, the claims or drawings originally attached to the request” is judged on a case by case basis.

16 LAW DIVISION PATENT DIVISION TRADEMARK & DESIGN DIVISION ACCOUNTING & AUDITING DIVISION YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING Kazuaki Okimoto mail to: Expecting amendments allowable Practitioners may make more amendments under the new guidelines than under the old ones. Please bear in mind that under the old guidelines any amendment must be clearly and unambiguously supported by the specification as of the filing date.

17 LAW DIVISION PATENT DIVISION TRADEMARK & DESIGN DIVISION ACCOUNTING & AUDITING DIVISION YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING Kazuaki Okimoto mail to: Applicable Patent Laws The requirements and restrictions on amendments to patent specifications, including claims, have been changed twice in recent last years. Consequently, the filing date determines which of the three different versions of the patent law the JPO applies to a particular application.

18 LAW DIVISION PATENT DIVISION TRADEMARK & DESIGN DIVISION ACCOUNTING & AUDITING DIVISION YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING Kazuaki Okimoto mail to: Applicable Patent Laws The latest change in the patent law that affects amendments went into effect on July 1, 1995, and applies to applications filed on or after that date. Earlier applications are governed by either the law in effect from January 1, 1994, to June 30, 1995, or the law as it stood on or before December 31, Since the more recent versions of the law are likely be of most interest to you, this summary will discuss the current amendment requirements.

19 LAW DIVISION PATENT DIVISION TRADEMARK & DESIGN DIVISION ACCOUNTING & AUDITING DIVISION YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING Kazuaki Okimoto mail to: Current practice - Amendment to Applications Filed on or after July 1, 1995

20 LAW DIVISION PATENT DIVISION TRADEMARK & DESIGN DIVISION ACCOUNTING & AUDITING DIVISION YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING Kazuaki Okimoto mail to: Timing of Amendments (1) Before receiving a Notice of Allowance or a Notice of Reasons for Rejection The revision of the law that went into effect on July 1, 1995, dramatically eased the limitations on the timing of amendments. The specification and drawings in these applications may now be amended and divisional applications filed at any time prior to the transmittal to the applicant of a notice that a patent is granted or that reasons for rejection exist

21 LAW DIVISION PATENT DIVISION TRADEMARK & DESIGN DIVISION ACCOUNTING & AUDITING DIVISION YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING Kazuaki Okimoto mail to: Timing of Amendments (2) After receiving a Notice of Reasons for Rejection If a Notice of Reasons for Rejection has been sent, the applicant must respond within the time limit set, generally, for applicants domiciled outside Japan, three months, which may be extended once for an additional three months. The official fee for the extension is 2,100 yen. Japanese applicants are allowed 60 days with no extension. When a final Notice of Reasons for Rejection is issued, applicants are allowed to also make amendments within the time limit set, which is usually the same as for the initial Notice of Reasons for Rejection.

22 LAW DIVISION PATENT DIVISION TRADEMARK & DESIGN DIVISION ACCOUNTING & AUDITING DIVISION YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING Kazuaki Okimoto mail to: Timing of Amendments (3) After receiving a Final Rejection If the JPO issues the final rejection against the application, the applicant may file an appeal against the final rejection to the Appeal Board of the Patent Office within 90 days from the certified copy of the decision. Once the appeal is filed, the applicant has an additional 30 days (unextendible) to prepare and file an amendment designed to overcome the reasons for rejection. If an amendment is filed, the original examiner re-examines the application to determine if the amendment overcomes the reasons for final rejection. If so, he or she reverses the previous final rejection decision and issues a decision to grant a patent. If not, the application is transferred to the Appeal Board, which considers the amendment and the argument in the appeal brief.

23 LAW DIVISION PATENT DIVISION TRADEMARK & DESIGN DIVISION ACCOUNTING & AUDITING DIVISION YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING Kazuaki Okimoto mail to: Scope of Amendments after receiving a final Notice of Reasons for Rejection We expect a more flexible way of amending the claims, the description and drawings in applying the new guidelines. After receiving a final Notice of Reasons for Rejection, however, the amendment is limited to the following according to Section 17 bis (4) of the Patent Law:

24 LAW DIVISION PATENT DIVISION TRADEMARK & DESIGN DIVISION ACCOUNTING & AUDITING DIVISION YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING Kazuaki Okimoto mail to: (i) the cancellation of the claim or claims; (ii) the restriction of the claim or claims; (iii) the correction of errors in the description; (iv) the clarification of an ambiguous description. Scope of Amendments after receiving a final Notice of Reasons for Rejection

25 LAW DIVISION PATENT DIVISION TRADEMARK & DESIGN DIVISION ACCOUNTING & AUDITING DIVISION YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING Thank you for your attention ! Kazuaki Okimoto Patent Attorney YUASA and HARA