Patent Prosecution Luncheon February 2014. Defective Priority Claim Means No Priority Claim Each intermediate application in the chain of priority must.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
First Action Interview Pilot Program Overview. Pilot Program Objectives Promote personal interviews prior to issuance of a first Office action on the.
Advertisements

1 1 1 AIPLA Firm Logo American Intellectual Property Law Association USPTO Proposal to Require Identification of Patent Owners Stephen S. Wentsler AIPPI/JFBA/AIPLA.
AIPLA PRESENTATION FOR USPTO PUBLIC HEARING ON REEXAMINATION Q. TODD DICKINSON AIPLA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR JUNE 1,
© Kolisch Hartwell 2013 All Rights Reserved, Page 1 America Invents Act (AIA) Implementation in 2012 Peter D. Sabido Intellectual Property Attorney Kolisch.
Accelerating Patent Prosecution Thursday, October 18, 2012.
Update on USPTO Activities November 18, 2014 Drew Hirshfeld Deputy Commissioner for Patent Examination Policy 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.
1 Charts of: The Four Time Periods for Submitting an IDS and Their Corresponding Requirements “Changes to Information Disclosure Statement Requirements.
1 Hatch-Waxman Boot Camp July 19-20, 2010 Mary C. Till Legal Advisor Office of Patent Legal Administration.
1 1 1 AIPLA American Intellectual Property Law Association USPTO Updates Including Glossary Pilot Program Chris Fildes Fildes & Outland, P.C. IP Practice.
PROSECUTION APPEALS Presented at: Webb & Co. Rehovot, Israel Date: February 14, 2013 Presented by: Roy D. Gross Associate St. Onge Steward Johnston & Reens.
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: Approaching the Finish Line January 29, 2013 Janet Gongola Patent Reform Coordinator Direct dial:
BIPC.COM STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS OF POST ISSUANCE PATENTABILITY REVIEW: THE NEW, OLD, AND NO LONGER Presented By: Todd R. Walters, Esq. B UCHANAN, I NGERSOLL.
Robert M. Hansen The Marbury Law Group PLLC AIPLA Practical Patent Prosecution Training for New Lawyers August 2009Alexandria, VA Issuance, Term, Certificates.
America Invents Act (AIA) Changes in Patent Law That Impact Companies May Mowzoon: Mowzoon Law Office, PLLC 1.
Filing Compliant Reexam Requests Andy Kashnikow SPE, Central Reexamination Unit Andy Kashnikow SPE, Central Reexamination Unit June, 2010.
Q. TODD DICKINSON EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AMERICAN INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW ASSOCIATION (AIPLA) USPTO PUBLIC MEETING JULY 20, 2010 AIPLA Comments: Enhanced.
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
Patent Term Adjustments and Extensions
Patent Term Adjustment (Bio/Chem. Partnership) Kery Fries, Sr. Legal Advisor Phone: (571)
USPTO Implementation of the America Invents Act Teresa Stanek Rea Deputy Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Deputy Director of the.
1 Patent Term Extension under 35 U.S.C. § 156 Mary C. Till Legal Advisor Office of Patent Legal Administration.
AIA Strategies.
July 18, Changes to Patent Fees Under the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2005 (H.R. 4818/P.L ) Topic: Patent Fees Office of Patent Legal.
Attributable Ownership Public Hearing March 13, 2014: Alexandria, VA.
Ashok K. Mannava Mannava & Kang, P.C. Expedited Examination Programs from the PTO February 12, 2012.
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.
1 United States Patent and Trademark Office PETITIONS PRACTICE USPTO Office of Patent Legal Administration PETITIONS PRACTICE COMMON ERRORS.
Patent Term Adjustment (PTA) Recent Developments in PTA Practice and Strategies for Maximizing PTA Presented to NJIPLA December 9, 2009 Jack Brennan Fish.
FITZPATRICK, CELLA, HARPER & SCINTO © 2011 | 1 ACI's Maximizing Pharmaceutical Patent Life Cycles Conference PTE-PTA Boot Camp.
Attributable Ownership Public Hearing March 26, 2014: San Francisco, CA.
Remy Yucel Director, CRU (571) Central Reexamination Unit and the AIA.
Biotechnology/Chemical/Pharmaceutical Customer Partnership Topic: Biotechnology/Chemical/Pharmaceutical Customer Partnership Topic: Biological Deposits.
Update: “A” “B” “C”s of USPTO Patent Term Adjustment IP Practice in Japan Pre-Meeting Seminar 2013 AIPLA Mid-Winter Institute Ron Harris The Harris Firm.
Christopher J. Fildes Fildes & Outland, P.C. Derivation Proceedings and Prior User Rights.
Implementation Perspective of the USPTO on the “American Inventors Protection Act of 1999” (P.L ); and the changes to implement the Patent Business.
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.
Post-Grant & Inter Partes Review Procedures Presented to AIPPI, Italy February 10, 2012 By Joerg-Uwe Szipl Griffin & Szipl, P.C.
Prosecution Lunch Patents January Reminder: USPTO Fee Changes- Jan. 1, 2014 Issue Fee Decrease- delay paying if you can –Issue Fee: from $1,780.
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)
1 United States Patent and Trademark Office PTA Post Wyeth USPTO OPLA - Kery A. Fries PTA Post Wyeth Wyeth v. Kappos (Fed. Cir. Jan. 7, 2010 )
Securing Innovation Michael D. Stein Stein, McEwen & Bui LLP 1400 Eye Street, NW Suite 300 Washington, DC (202)
Claims and Continuations Final Rule Overview Briefing for Examiners 1.
New Ex Parte Appeal Rules Patent and Trademark Practice Group Meeting January 26, 2012.
© COPYRIGHT DICKSTEIN SHAPIRO LLP. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Post Grant Proceedings Before the USPTO and Litigation Strategies Under the AIA Panelists:David.
QualityDefinition.PPACMeeting AdlerDraft 1 1 Improving the Quality of Patents Marc Adler PPAC meeting June 18, 2009.
Claims and Continuations Final Rule 1 Joni Y. Chang Senior Legal Advisor Office of Patent Legal Administration (571) ,
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.
James Toupin – General Counsel February 1, Summary of Proposed Rule Changes to Continuations, Double Patenting, and Claims.
Patent Fee Proposal Patent Public Advisory Committee Hearing November 19, 2015.
Derivation Proceedings Gene Quinn Patent Attorney IPWatchdog.com March 27 th, 2012.
Prosecution Group Luncheon Patent October PTO News Backlog of applications continues to decrease –623,000 now, decreasing about 5,000/ month –Expected.
2007 Revisions to Japanese Patent Law. 2 #1 Period for Filing Divisional Applications (A) BeforeBefore AfterAfter Notice of Allowance Divisional Application.
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,
Bruce Kisliuk Group Director, Technology Center 1600.
Prosecution Lunch October Bits and Pieces from the Patent Side Crowing about reduction in pending cases –From 750K a year ago to about 708K now.
1 1 AIPLA 1 1 American Intellectual Property Law Association USPTO Post-Grant Procedures and Effective Use of Reissue AIPLA IP Practice in Japan Committee.
1 TOPIC III - PATENT INVALIDATION PROCEDURES EU-CHINA WORKSHOP ON THE CHINESE PATENT LAW HARBIN, SEPTEMBER 2008 Dr. Gillian Davies.
Recent Developments in Obtaining and Enforcing Intellectual Property Rights in Nanocomposites Michael P. Dilworth February 28, 2012.
US Patent Application Drafting Center Presentation ppt Patent Stats That Can Help Your Practice Electronic & Computer Law Committee Manny Schecter.
Claims and Continuations Final Rule
PATENT LAW TREATY Gena Jones Senior Legal Advisor
Speeding It Up at the USPTO
Third Party Pre-Issuance Submissions Under AIA
Presentation transcript:

Patent Prosecution Luncheon February 2014

Defective Priority Claim Means No Priority Claim Each intermediate application in the chain of priority must refer to the prior applications –Ex: If Application C claims priority through Application B to Application A, not only must Application C say so, but Application B must have said that it claims priority to Application A. –“this application” means the present application  Not “application B” when recited in application C  Not “what a reasonable person would understand it to mean in context” –Medtronic CoreValve LLC vs. Edwards Lifesciences Corp. (CAFC Jan 22, 2014)

PTA Calculation Reminder: –Only applies to applications filed on or after June 8, 1995 –Does not extend past a terminal disclaimer –Only applies to Plant and Utility patents (not design) –Different analysis for applications filed on or after May 29, 2000 A term >14 months from 1 st Action >4 months for PTO to respond to formal transmittal >4 months for PTO to take action on BPAI or Fed. Ct. action* >4 months for issuance after payment of issue fee

+ B term PTA Calculation Reminder: –Only applies to applications filed on or after June 8, 1995 –Does not extend past a terminal disclaimer –Only applies to Plant and Utility patents (not design) –Different analysis for applications filed on or after May 29, 2000 A term >3 years from filing before issuance Subtract continued exam (RCE) Subtract interference actions Subtract secrecy orders Subtract Appeal Subtract applicant requested delay

+ C term + B term PTA Calculation Reminder: –Only applies to applications filed on or after June 8, 1995 –Does not extend past a terminal disclaimer –Only applies to Plant and Utility patents (not design) –Different analysis for applications filed on or after May 29, 2000 A term Add days for interference Add days for secrecy order Add days for successful appeal

+ C term - AB overlap + B term PTA Calculation Reminder: –Only applies to applications filed on or after June 8, 1995 –Does not extend past a terminal disclaimer –Only applies to Plant and Utility patents (not design) –Different analysis for applications filed on or after May 29, 2000 A term

+ C term - AB overlap - AC overlap + B term PTA Calculation Reminder: –Only applies to applications filed on or after June 8, 1995 –Does not extend past a terminal disclaimer –Only applies to Plant and Utility patents (not design) –Different analysis for applications filed on or after May 29, 2000 A term

+ C term - AB overlap - AC overlap - Applicant delay + B term PTA Calculation Reminder: –Only applies to applications filed on or after June 8, 1995 –Does not extend past a terminal disclaimer –Only applies to Plant and Utility patents (not design) –Different analysis for applications filed on or after May 29, 2000 A term >3 months to respond to OAs Requests for suspension or deferring issuance Reviving an abandoned application Late payment of issue fee Procedural “conversion” of provisional to non-provisional

+ C term - AB overlap - AC overlap - Applicant delay + B term PTA Calculation Reminder: –Only applies to applications filed on or after June 8, 1995 –Does not extend past a terminal disclaimer –Only applies to Plant and Utility patents (not design) –Different analysis for applications filed on or after May 29, 2000 A term PTA

+ C term - AB overlap - AC overlap - Applicant delay + B term PTA Calculation Reminder: –Only applies to applications filed on or after June 8, 1995 –Does not extend past a terminal disclaimer –Only applies to Plant and Utility patents (not design) –Different analysis for applications filed on or after May 29, 2000 A term PTA Novartis thought this only applied if the RCE was filed within three years of the filing date. Time consumed by an RCE is subtracted regardless of when the RCE is filed! …But, you can start counting B period again after notice of allowance. Novartis AG v. Lee (CAFC, Jan. 15, 2014)

RCE Impact on PTA The exclusion from PTA in 35 U.S.C. § 154(b)(1)(B)(ii) excludes from PTA any time consumed by a Request for Continued Examination (RCE), even if that RCE is filed more than 3 years after the “actual filing date” of the patent application. –“ [PTA] time should be calculated by determining the length of the time between the application [filing date] and patent issuance, and then subtracting any [RCE time period] and determining the extent to which result exceeds three years.” –“Such a reading ensures that applicants recover for any ‘delay[s] due to the failure of the [PTO],’ without allowing the applicant to recover for ‘any time consumed by continued examination,’ as the statute requires.” –Novartis AG v. Lee (January 15, 2014)

USPTO Proposed Rule Change The proposed changes to the rules would require that the "attributable owner" be identified: –at the time an application is filed (or shortly thereafter), –during the pendency of an application when there is a change in the attributable owner (within three months of such change), –at the time the issue fee is paid, –when maintenance fee payments are made, and –if a patent becomes involved in supplemental examination, ex parte reexamination, or a trial proceeding before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Comments on the notice of proposed rulemaking, which must be submitted by March 25, 2014, can be sent by to