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.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
MELISSA ASFAHANI Patent Attorney El Paso, TX
Advertisements

By David W. Hill AIPLA Immediate Past President Partner Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP Overview of the America Invents Act.
© 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.
Joint Meeting of PIPLA and NJIPLA February 7, 2012 Kenneth N. Nigon RatnerPrestia 1.
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 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.
Speeding It Up at the USPTO July 2013 July 23, 2013.
America Invents Act (AIA) Changes in Patent Law That Impact Companies May Mowzoon: Mowzoon Law Office, PLLC 1.
Appeal Practice Before Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences
TC1600 Appeals Practice Jean Witz, Appeals Specialist.
1 1 AIPLA Firm Logo American Intellectual Property Law Association Modifications to the USPTO Count System Sponsored by the Chartered Institute of Patent.
July 8, Enhanced Examination Timing Control Robert A. Clarke Deputy Director Office of Patent Legal Administration
WIPO ARBITRATION AND MEDIATION CENTER 1 Ignacio de Castro WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center February, 2008 Arbitration of Intellectual.
Greg H. Gardella Ex Parte and Inter Partes Reexamination Tactics AIPLA 2010 Winter Institute.
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
JPAA International Activities Center Nobuo Sekine
Appeal Practice Refresher Office of Patent Training.
The U.S. Patent System is Changing – A Summary of the New Patent Reform Law.
AIA Strategies.
A Comparative Analysis of Patent Post-Grant Review Procedures in the U
July 18, Changes to Patent Fees Under the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2005 (H.R. 4818/P.L ) Topic: Patent Fees Office of Patent Legal.
Information Disclosure Statements
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 1 AIPLA Firm Logo American Intellectual Property Law Association Updates regarding: Global/IP5 PPH pilot program at the USPTO and Patent Law Treaty (PLT)
Remy Yucel Director, CRU (571) Central Reexamination Unit and the AIA.
Investing in research, making a difference. Patent Basics for UW Researchers Leah Haman Intellectual Property Associate WARF 1.
1 LAW DIVISION PATENT DIVISION TRADEMARK & DESIGN DIVISION ACCOUNTING & AUDITING DIVISION YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING.
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.
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.
Practice Before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences.
Yoshiki KITANO JPAA International Activities Center AIPLA Annual Meeting, 2014 IP Practice in Japan Committee Pre-Meeting Seminar Post-Grant Opposition.
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 1 AIPLA American Intellectual Property Law Association Updates on the USPTO Chris Fildes AIPLA-JPAA Joint Meeting April 9, 2013.
After Final Practice Linda M. Saltiel June 2, 2015.
Claims and Continuations Final Rule Overview Briefing for Examiners 1.
Patent Prosecution May PCT- RCE Zombie 371 National Stage PCT Applications –Not Allowed to file an RCE until signed inventor oath/declaration is.
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.
QualityDefinition.PPACMeeting AdlerDraft 1 1 Improving the Quality of Patents Marc Adler PPAC meeting June 18, 2009.
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.
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,
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.
The Impact of Patent Reform on Independent Inventors and Start-up Companies Mark Nowotarski (Patent Agent)
Accelerated Patent Examination: Green Technology A Summary of Global Initiatives, with specific discussion of the US Speaker: Matt Prater Preparation help.
PTAB Litigation 2016 Part 5 – Motions Practice, Discovery, and Trial Management Issues 1.
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.
Recent Developments in Obtaining and Enforcing Intellectual Property Rights in Nanocomposites Michael P. Dilworth February 28, 2012.
Current Situation of JP Patent based on Statistics (from view point of attacking pending and granted patents) Nobuo Sekine Japan Patent Attorneys Association.
Prosecution Luncheon Patent July 2016
Prosecution Luncheon Patent August 2016
Claims and Continuations Final Rule
USPTO Appeal Process: Appeal Strategies and New Rules
PATENT LAW TREATY Gena Jones Senior Legal Advisor
Los Angeles Intellectual Property Law Association
Presentation transcript:

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

Quick Path Information Disclosure Statement (QPIDS) After Final Consideration Pilot (AFCP) 2.0 First Action Interview Pilot Program Extended Missing Parts Pilot Program Glossary Pilot Program Expedited Patent Appeal Pilot Streamlined Expedited Patent Appeal Pilot for Small Entity Collaborative Search Pilot Program Proposed Pilot Program on Alternative Approach to Institution Decision PILOT PROGRAMS 2 © AIPLA 2015

IDS submissions after payment of the issue fee are considered by examiners before determining whether prosecution should be reopened RCE fee is paid up-front when the Quick Path submission is filed fee is returned to the applicant if the examiner determines that none of the items of information in the IDS require further consideration if the examiner should determine that further consideration is in fact required, then the USPTO will enter the RCE and keep the RCE fee Quick Path Information Disclosure Statement (QPIDS) © AIPLA

providing a mechanism for examiners to further consider an application after issuance of a final action must include an amendment to at least one independent claim that does not broaden the scope of the independent claim in any aspect the examiner is required to initiate an interview to explain the basis for not entering the amendment After Final Consideration Pilot (AFCP) 2.0 © AIPLA

provides an applicant with the opportunity to conduct an interview with the examiner prior to the examiner issuing a first Office Action examiner conducts a prior art search and provides the applicant with a report summarizing the relevant prior art and proposed rejections applicant schedules an interview and provides the examiner with proposed amendments and arguments If agreement can be reached during the interview, then the application may be allowed without an Office Action if agreement is not reached, then the examiner will issue a first Office Action and the case will proceed as normal First Action Interview Pilot Program © AIPLA

allows applicants to delay payment of the search and examination fees for 12 months after the filing of a non-provisional application properly claiming priority to a provisional application the basic filing fee remains due at the time of filing the non-provisional application applicant may not request non-publication of the application Extended Missing Parts Pilot Program © AIPLA

the specification of the patent application must be drafted to include a glossary of term definitions at the beginning of the detailed description section the application must be in a U.S. patent class that is examined by Technology Centers 2100, 2400, or 2600, or the business methods area of Technology Center 3600 the definitions are binding upon the applicant and later cannot be amended during prosecution Glossary Pilot Program © AIPLA

provides an appellant with expedited review of one ex parte appeal in exchange for withdrawing another ex parte appeal both appeals must have been issued docketing notices before June 19, 2015, and both the applications which are appealed must name at least one common inventor or be owned by the same party as of June 19, 2015 USPTO desires to render final decisions in appeals made special under this program within six months Expedited Patent Appeal Pilot © AIPLA

the appellant must be entitled to small or micro entity status the appeal being expedited must be the appellant’s only pending appeal the appeal must have been pending before the Board as of September 18, 2015 the appeal cannot involve any claim subject to a Section 112 rejection the appellant must agree that the PTAB may select a single claim from each ground of rejection on which basis the decision will be made USPTO’s goal is to issue a final decision for these expedited appeals within 6 months Streamlined Expedited Patent Appeal Pilot for Small Entity © AIPLA

USPTO jointly launched collaborative search pilot programs with each of the JPO and the Korean Intellectual Property Office to participate in the program, a petition must be filed and granted in both the U.S. application and the counterpart Japanese or Korean application the petitions in the U.S. and foreign office should be filed within fifteen days of each other Collaborative Search Pilot Program © AIPLA

when the petition is filed, an Office Action on the merits must not have been issued in the application, and the earliest priority date of the application must be post-AIA the U.S. application must have no more than 3 independent claims and 20 total claims directed to a single invention, and the claims of the U.S. application must substantially correspond to those in the counterpart Japanese or Korean application a claims correspondence table indicating the substantial correspondence of the independent claims must be filed with the petition a preliminary amendment may be filed to bring the claims in compliance with the program requirements Collaborative Search Pilot Program (continued) © AIPLA

in the JPO pilot, the USPTO and JPO will exchange search results identifying best prior art and provide a consolidated report that combines the work of the two offices in the KIPO pilot, the USPTO and KIPO will each conduct independent searches and provide separate reports for the applicant to consider the applicant will receive the search report and will be given the option of conducting an interview with the examiner prior to the examiner conducting a full examination of the claims and issuing an Office Action Collaborative Search Pilot Program (continued) © AIPLA

USPTO proposes to randomly select IPR petitions for inclusion in the program over a period of three to six months the program would provide that a single APJ (administrative patent judge) would make an institution decision, whereupon institution of the IPR two additional judges would be appointed to the trial, or in other circumstances three new judges would be assigned to the panel for the trial Proposed Pilot Program on IPR Institution Decision © AIPLA

Law School Clinic Certification Pilot Program Pro Se Pilot Examination Unit Other Programs © AIPLA

Thank you! Chris Fildes Fildes & Outland, P.C © AIPLA