http://www.ipwatchdog.com Patents, Software Patents, Patent Applications & Patent Law Tue, 21 May 2013 18:04:03 +0000 en-US hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1 http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/03/21/david-kappos-headlines-post-grant-patent-trial-program-in-ny/id=37847/ http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/03/21/david-kappos-headlines-post-grant-patent-trial-program-in-ny/id=37847/#comments Fri, 22 Mar 2013 01:05:52 +0000 Gene Quinn http://www.ipwatchdog.com/?p=37847 Related posts:

1. PTO Proposes Rules of Practice for Patent Trials before BoardThe United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has proposed a consolidated set of rules related to trial practice before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The proposed rules implement the provisions of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act relating to inter partes review, post-grant review, the transitional program for covered business method patents, and derivation proceedings....
2. Kappos on Patent Trial and Appeal Board Trial ProceedingsKappos explained that the PTAB has started and will continue, in at least some cases, to issue shorter per curiam decisions, which will allow them to decide more cases and move through the backlog. Co-Chair of the program, Rob Sterne, asked Kappos whether this would present problems for those who might want to appeal to the Federal Circuit. Given the standards applied by the Federal Circuit will it be possible for an applicant ever be able to satisfy the standards? Kappos acknowledged that is a concern and why we will see hundreds of shorter per curiam decisions rather than thousands....
3. America Invents: The Unintended Consequences of Patent ReformNotwithstanding the inherent unreliability of legislative history and the truly scary prospect of trying to get inside the head of Members of Congress, it seems fairly clear to me that the America Invents Act, which was signed into law by President Obama on September 16, 2012, contains at least a handful of things that can only be characterized as unintended consequences. Among them are: (1) U.S. patents issued from foreign filings will be prior art as of the foreign filing date; (2) commonly owned patent applications cannot be used against each other for novelty purposes; and (3) the creation of...

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin. ]]> http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/03/21/david-kappos-headlines-post-grant-patent-trial-program-in-ny/id=37847/feed/ 1 http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2012/09/10/first-inventor-to-file-uspto-derivation-proceedings-go-final/id=27986/ http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2012/09/10/first-inventor-to-file-uspto-derivation-proceedings-go-final/id=27986/#comments Mon, 10 Sep 2012 15:26:19 +0000 Gene Quinn http://www.ipwatchdog.com/?p=27986 Related posts:

1. Change? Derviation May Feel a Lot Like Interference PracticeHow this will philosophically change things remains unclear because the America Invents Act requires that the petition filed to institute a derivation proceeding demonstrate that the claimed invention in the subject application or patent was derived from an inventor named in the petitioner’s application without authorization. The Patent Office has also recognized the similarity between derivation proceedings and interference practice, saying: "Petitions to institute derivation proceedings, while distinct from interference practice, raise similar issues to those that may be raised in interferences in a motion for judgment on priority of invention. Currently, motions for judgment on priority of invention, including...
2. USPTO Publishes Final Rules and Guidelines Governing First-Inventor-to-FileThe U.S. Department of Commerce’s United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) today published final rules of practice implementing the first-inventor-to-file provision of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA). The USPTO also today published final examination guidelines setting forth the agency’s interpretation of how the first-inventor-to-file provision alters novelty and obviousness determinations for an invention claimed in a patent application. In particular, the agency’s final examination guidelines inform the public and patent examiners how the AIA’s changes to the novelty provisions of law alter the scope of what is prior art to a claimed invention and how the new grace...
3. PTO Proposes Rules of Practice for Patent Trials before BoardThe United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has proposed a consolidated set of rules related to trial practice before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The proposed rules implement the provisions of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act relating to inter partes review, post-grant review, the transitional program for covered business method patents, and derivation proceedings....

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin. ]]> http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2012/09/10/first-inventor-to-file-uspto-derivation-proceedings-go-final/id=27986/feed/ 9 http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2012/04/09/change-derviation-may-feel-a-lot-like-interference-practice/id=24020/ http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2012/04/09/change-derviation-may-feel-a-lot-like-interference-practice/id=24020/#comments Mon, 09 Apr 2012 17:18:22 +0000 Gene Quinn http://www.ipwatchdog.com/?p=24020 Related posts:

1. First Inventor to File: USPTO Derivation Proceedings Go FinalSection 42.405(c) provides that a derivation is not sufficiently shown unless it is supported by substantial evidence. This includes at least one affidavit addressing communication and lack of authorization. Further, the showing of communication must be corroborated. One open practical question is whether derivation proceedings will be at all useful. How will the inventor alleging derivation be in possession of sufficient evidence to demonstrate communication and lack of authorization? The best evidence of each will be in the hands of the party who is the alleged deriver, not the inventor claiming to be the source of the invention. Moreover, proving...
2. Patent Truth and Consequence: File First Even in the U.S.The date of invention relates to your conception. This is true whether you are engaging in an interference proceeding seeking to obtain a claim instead of another who is also seeking the claim, or you are attempting to demonstrate that you can get behind a reference used by an examiner because you have an earlier date of invention. The hallmark of a first to invent system is that those who file second can obtain a patent under very strictly limited scenarios. A byproduct of a first to invent system is that if the examiner finds prior art you can "swear...
3. Reform Doing Away with Interference Proceedings & First to InventOne of the proposals in the pending patent reform legislation is a change from first to invent to a first to file system. The trouble is that an interference proceeding, the proceeding that would take place to determine who is entitled to receive the patent between the alleged first to invent and the first to file, costs about $600,000. Not many independent inventors or small businesses are going to be able to foot that bill for sure. Nevertheless, I thought it might be good to take a look at this thing called an interference proceeding, which if patent reform is...

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin. ]]> http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2012/04/09/change-derviation-may-feel-a-lot-like-interference-practice/id=24020/feed/ 2 http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2012/02/28/aia-proposed-rules-fees-at-the-patent-trial-and-appeal-board/id=22504/ http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2012/02/28/aia-proposed-rules-fees-at-the-patent-trial-and-appeal-board/id=22504/#comments Wed, 29 Feb 2012 01:59:10 +0000 Gene Quinn http://www.ipwatchdog.com/?p=22504 Related posts:

1. USPTO Proposes Significantly Higher Patent FeesThe recurring theme will be decreased fees for those who qualify for micro-entity status, but increased fees for everyone else. That is great, but micro-entity status will not even apply to all independent inventors, but only a subset of independent inventors who are at the lowest end of the income scale and who have had very few patents or patent applications. Thus, even the professional garage inventor will be a small entity and will pay more — in some cases substantially more — than they pay now. Not to mention the small businesses that are the engine of the U.S....
2. PTO Proposes Rules of Practice for Patent Trials before BoardThe United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has proposed a consolidated set of rules related to trial practice before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The proposed rules implement the provisions of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act relating to inter partes review, post-grant review, the transitional program for covered business method patents, and derivation proceedings....
3. Kappos, Prost, Armitage and Dickinson Discuss AIA at AIPLAKappos on final rules to implement the AIA: "We put together a good set of rules, but they are by no means a perfect set of rules." Kappos explained that typically in Washington administrative rules are written and may be changed some time in the future, but not very quickly. That was not the USPTO approach. "Our approach was different," he explained. The USPTO approach is one of continuing improvement. "We are already talking about convening the state holder community again after a few months when there is data to discuss." The goal is to get feedback and make any...

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin. ]]> http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2012/02/28/aia-proposed-rules-fees-at-the-patent-trial-and-appeal-board/id=22504/feed/ 10 http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2012/02/09/pto-proposes-rules-of-practice-for-patent-trials-before-board/id=22209/ http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2012/02/09/pto-proposes-rules-of-practice-for-patent-trials-before-board/id=22209/#comments Thu, 09 Feb 2012 21:46:45 +0000 U.S.P.T.O. http://www.ipwatchdog.com/?p=22209 Related posts:

1. USPTO Publishes Final Rules for Administrative Trials Under AIAThe U.S. Department of Commerce’s United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) announced today that it will publish final rules in the Federal Register on August 14, 2012, to implement three administrative trial provisions of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA); inter partes review, post-grant review, and the transitional program for covered business method patents. The administrative trial final rules offer a third party a timely, cost-effective alternative to district court litigation for challenging the patentability of a claimed invention in an issued patent. These rules become effective on September 16, 2012. With this publication, all of the administrative trial...
2. AIA Proposed Rules: Fees at the Patent Trial and Appeal BoardThese proposed fees will undoubtedly be commented on, and the early criticism, which seems quite valid, asks how the addition of a single additional claim to be reviewed can add such large amounts to the cost. For example, if you file a petition for post-grant review and want 30 claims reviewed the fee will be $53,700. If you want 31 claims reviewed the fee will be $71,600, so that extra claim reviewed will cost you $17,900. Of course paying that $17,900 entitles you to bring challenges to 9 other claims, which would be free once you paid for the 31st...
3. David Kappos Headlines Post-Grant Patent Trial Program in NYA new addition to the program just announced today is David Kappos, who is the immediate former Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office. Kappos, a life-long employee of IBM prior to taking charge of the USPTO, is now with Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP in New York City. Kappos will discuss the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, specifically discussing ex parte reexamination, the remaining legacy inter partes reexamination cases, inter partes review and the transitional program relating to covered business method patents. His segment will run from 9:15 am to 10:15 am. In addition to being presented...

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin. ]]> http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2012/02/09/pto-proposes-rules-of-practice-for-patent-trials-before-board/id=22209/feed/ 0