Today's Date: December 19, 2014 Search | Home | Contact | Services | Patent Attorney | Patent Search | Provisional Patent Application | Patent Application | Software Patent | Confidentiality Agreements

Posts Tagged ‘ Patent Reform ’

Point – Counterpoint: The Debate Over Prior User Rights

Posted: Thursday, Oct 27, 2011 @ 2:48 pm | Written by Gene Quinn | 53 comments
| Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in: America Invents Act, Gene Quinn, IP News, IPWatchdog.com Articles, Patent Litigation, Patent Reform, Patents

Since prior user rights first came up as an issue in the patent reform debate I have been opposed to the idea.  Whether I like prior user rights or not, the reality is that prior user rights are now a part of U.S. patent law.  Nevertheless, the debate goes on about whether prior user rights are a good idea.  In fact, the United States Patent and Trademark Office is tasked through the America Invents Act with conducting a Prior User Rights Study.  To facilitate this study a public hearing on prior user rights was held on October 25 in the Madison Auditorium at its Alexandria, Virginia campus of the USPTO.

With this in mind I thought I would once again revisit prior user rights. One of the arguments I have heard recently supporting prior user rights is that a corporation that is going to invest billions of dollars into a facility should know that their investment is safe and that the plant can’t be shut down by a later filed patent application.  This argument is so specious as to be nearly laughable if you ask me.  This strikes me as just more of corporate America wanting the government to save them from themselves.



Patent Reform and Patent Bar Review, What You Should Know

Posted: Tuesday, Oct 25, 2011 @ 7:30 am | Written by Gene Quinn & John White | 2 comments
| Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in: America Invents Act, Gene Quinn, IP News, IPWatchdog.com Articles, John White, Patent Bar Exam, Patent Bar Review, Patent Reform, Patents, Practising Law Institute

No doubt you have heard about the new law that is upon us in the land of patents; it’s in all the papers and on all the blogs.  The America Invents Act was signed by President Obama on September 16, 2011, and marks the largest single re-write of U.S. patent law ever.  Even the 1952 Patent Act pales in comparison because that was almost completely a codification of existing case law that had developed over the decades.  America Invents, however, embarks upon a new path and leads us into the great unknown in many respects.

Those preparing to take the patent bar exam or contemplating sitting for the exam at some point in time in the future likely don’t want to hear that U.S. patent law is heading into the great unknown.  How can you be expected to take a pass the patent bar examination under these circumstances?  First: Relax. You do not have to unlearn or forget what you are currently learning, or soon will learn, for the patent exam or for your practice life after you pass the exam.  That being said, the sooner you do take the patent bar exam the better off you will be!



America Invents: The Unintended Consequences of Patent Reform

Posted: Monday, Oct 24, 2011 @ 2:31 pm | Written by Gene Quinn | 18 comments
| Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in: Congress, Gene Quinn, IP News, IPWatchdog.com Articles, Patent Reform, Patents

It is virtually impossible to in any intellectually honest way truthfully determine what the legislative intent of Congress was for any particular piece of legislation.  Justice Antonin Scalia has railed against the use of legislative history for decades, saying “legislative history is irrelevant when the statutory text is clear,” and referring to the “legal fiction” that legislative history, including Committee Reports, actually reflect the intent of the Congress.  This is, of course, because it is exceptionally easy to get something into the legislative history, so anything that appears in the legislative history may only be the view of one particular Member of Congress, or worse the view of a lobbyist paying for access.  There is also the problem associated with Members of Congress saying things they simply don’t understand, and the reality that the legislative history cannot be cross examined.  Even Committee Reports are at best the view of a majority of a group that makes up a small fraction of the overall Congress.  It seems a fools errand to rely on legislative history in all but the rarest case, and Scalia’s view seems to be the prevailing view of this Supreme Court.

Notwithstanding 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, 2011, 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 an post grant challenge limbo because of the delay in initiating post-grant review procedures.



USPTO to Conduct Studies of Prior User Rights and International Patent Protection for Small Businesses per America Invents Act

Posted: Tuesday, Oct 18, 2011 @ 3:01 pm | Written by U.S.P.T.O. | Comments Off
| Tags: , , , , , ,
Posted in: America Invents Act, Congress, International, IP News, IPWatchdog.com Articles, Patent Reform, Patents, USPTO

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) released two Federal Register Notices on October 7, 2011, seeking written comments and announcing two public hearings for two studies the agency is required to conduct under the America Invents Act. Specifically, Congress is requiring the USPTO to study and report on the availability of prior user rights in foreign countries as well as options to aid small businesses and independent inventors in securing patent protection for their inventions. The USPTO reports for both studies are due in mid-January 2012.

“The objective of the written comments and hearings is to collect information from the public on the scope of the two studies,” said Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the USPTO David Kappos. “Public participation in both the Prior User Rights Study and the International Patent Protection Study is necessary to assist the agency in preparing for Congress the most informed and accurate report possible.”



America Invents: A Simple Guide to Patent Reform, Part 2

Posted: Thursday, Oct 13, 2011 @ 5:32 pm | Written by Gene Quinn | 5 comments
| Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in: America Invents Act, Congress, Gene Quinn, IP News, IPWatchdog.com Articles, Patent Reform, Patents

I have done quite a bit of writing about the America Invents Act, but I have been a bit derelict in providing the sequel to America Invents: A Simple Guide to Patent Reform, Part 1.  Part of the reason, if not the entirety of the reason, is that the major parts of the American Invents Act that remain are anything but simple.

I was speaking with John White via telephone yesterday about the America Invents Act.  Yes, John and I are thoroughly immersed in this legislation and coming up with wrinkle after wrinkle that you probably never thought about.  Fun I know, but that is what two wild, crazy and tremendously charismatic patent attorneys talk about!  In any event, I told him I was having difficulty and asked him — how do you describe prior user rights, post-grant review and supplemental examination simply?  His response: “You don’t.”  We went on to talk about how first to file isn’t all that simple either, although the name suggests otherwise.  This thing, the monstrosity that is the America Invents Act, will be a full employment act for lawyers!  But when is it ever good for clients when it is good for the attorneys?

In any event, on this note I embark upon Part 2, which will seek to make sense of prior user rights, post-grant review, preissuance submission and patentability changes. This will leave inter partes review, supplemental examination and derivation proceedings for the finale — Part 3.  I will endeavor to describe these in the most straight forward way possible, but I am going to completely punt on Section 18 as it pertains to business methods and post-grant review, at least for now.  I just see no way to explain that in a “simple” way.  Notwithstanding, look for an article on Section 18 soon (a relative term I know), along with an article about specific peculiarities and likely unintended consequences of the Act.



Some More Heretical Thoughts on Strategies for Coping with First to File Under the America Invents Act*

Posted: Wednesday, Oct 5, 2011 @ 12:20 pm | Written by Eric Guttag | 23 comments
| Tags: , , , , , , ,
Posted in: America Invents Act, Authors, Eric Guttag, IP News, IPWatchdog.com Articles, Patent Reform, Patents

Now that the “ink is dry” on the American Invents Act (which I refer to as the “Abominable Inane Act” or AIA), it’s now time to consider how to cope with (and even take advantage of) the AIA. See my prior article — American Davids of Innovation, Start Your Engines: Strategies for Coping with First to File Under the America Invents Act. Take advantage of the AIA? Oh, yes. I’m referring to the new “grace period” provision in Section 3(b)(1) (Exceptions for Disclosures Made 1 Year Or Less Before The Effective Filing Date Of The Claimed Invention) which will eventually become new 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(1) which may allow the inventor/patent applicant to have his/her cake and eat it too, come March 16, 2013 when this provision of the AIA goes into effect.



Prior Art Under America Invents: The USPTO Explains First to File

Posted: Tuesday, Oct 4, 2011 @ 6:16 pm | Written by Gene Quinn | 13 comments
| Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in: Congress, Gene Quinn, IP News, IPWatchdog.com Articles, Patent Reform, Patents, USPTO

By now virtually everyone in the patent and innovation communities knows that on September 16, 2011, President Barack Obama signed into law the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act.  This is an enormous change to U.S. patent laws, likely the largest change in U.S. patent law since at least 1790.  The last major re-write was in 1952, and that wasn’t a re-write so much as a codification of case law that had developed over the previous decades.  This is a major change and one that must be thoroughly and completely respected in terms of breadth and depth.

A lot of arguing has been going on here on IPWatchdog.com about certain portions of the so-called first to file provisions contained in the Act.  Truthfully, the new 102(b)(1)(B) is not written as clear as it probably could be, but I have steadfastly maintained that it provides only a personal grace-period, nothing more.  Many have criticized me at great lengths, and some have even told me via private e-mail they have stopped reading IPWatchdog because I am dead wrong.  I have even had a variety of entertaining discussions with Staffers on the Hill and a variety of senior attorneys and high ranking corporate counsel.  Notwithstanding those who vehemently disagree with me, with every new statement made by the United States Patent and Trademark Office my position seems to be further confirmed.

The grace-period provided to inventors is only a personal grace-period and subsequent disclosure that is not derived from the inventor will create a statutory bar to patentability.  My source?  The United States Patent and Trademark Office.



America Invents: A Simple Guide to Patent Reform, Part 1

Posted: Monday, Sep 26, 2011 @ 9:43 pm | Written by Gene Quinn | 77 comments
| Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in: America Invents Act, Congress, Gene Quinn, IP News, IPWatchdog.com Articles, Patent Litigation, Patent Reform, Patents

UPDATED: 11:50 am ET on 9/28/2011

Earlier today I spoke at the Practising Law Institute program on the America Invents Act. We had a good turnout in the room and an excellent turnout via webcast. The program was 4 hours long, and truthfully we could have gone on for at least several more hours without running out of material. For those who stayed online we ran long by about 20 minutes, and stayed talking with attendees and answering questions of live attendees for another 20 minutes. We are already talking about reprising the presentation for an audience at PLI’s New York City location on Seventh Avenue, so stay tuned.

There will be plenty of time to drill down on the particulars of the America Invents Act. The Act is dense, language choices from section to section in some places change and in other places remains the same, making you suspect that different terms must mean different things but the same term in different places has to mean the same thing, right? Our moderator, Denise Kettelberger (Faegre & Benson) said that patent attorneys should really read the Act about 10 times, which is really good advice.  Every time you read it you notice something a little different, and during the presentation of others today I found myself taking notes and looking up things in the Act with new understandings.  This is a major re-write of patent laws and not one that is at all simple.

That being said, I thought I might take this opportunity to provide a high level overview of the America Invents Act.  What follows is discussion of 5 provisions contained in the Act.  Look for an overview breakdown of additional provisions (prior user rights, supplemental examination, post-grant review, etc.) coming soon.



Reshaping U.S. Patent Law. Who are the Winners & Losers?

Posted: Thursday, Sep 22, 2011 @ 7:15 am | Written by Manus Cooney | 5 comments
| Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in: America Invents Act, Authors, Congress, IP News, IPWatchdog.com Articles, Patent Reform, Patents

Senator Leahy (left) and Congressman Smith (left) at AIA signing.

The America Invents Act reshapes U.S. patent law in fairly profound ways with established major industries benefitting, but providing unwanted challenges for some. The final bill changes the US system to a first-inventor-to-file system. It creates several post-grant review mechanisms whereby 3rd parties can challenge another’s patent application, including the allowance of submission of prior art by 3rd parties and the creation of a new, post-grant administrative review proceeding. The financial sector will get additional tools to address long-held concerns over “business method” patents such as those at that heart of litigation involving several large banks and a company which holds patents on processes for securing checks electronically. The AIA also effectively bans the practice of patenting tax strategies. The bill also restricts the practice of plaintiffs in infringement cases joining together large groups of defendants who may have no business relation to each other.



As Predicted, Congress Ready to Divert More Fees from USPTO

Posted: Wednesday, Sep 21, 2011 @ 4:51 pm | Written by Gene Quinn | 6 comments
| Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in: Congress, Gene Quinn, IP News, IPWatchdog.com Articles, Patent Reform, Patents, USPTO

The ink is hardly dry on the America Invents Act and Congress is already about to take money from the United States Patent and Trademark Office in violation of the promise of Congressman Rogers, who chairs the House Appropriations Committee.

It isn’t exactly a newflash to announce that Washington, D.C. is dysfunctional, anyone paying attention over the past few years has long since come to that conclusion.  Thus, it is hardly breaking news to report that Congress is on the verge of passing a Continuing Resolution rather than actually doing their job and passing a budget for fiscal year 2012.  Why do today what is required of you to fulfill the responsibilities of your job when you can just kick the can down the road?  Of course, by so doing Congress will embark upon a path that will divert some $600 million from the USPTO during FY 2012.



Traps for the Unwary Regarding Patent Claim Drafting and Definition of Prior Art Under Leahy Smith

Posted: Wednesday, Sep 21, 2011 @ 8:00 am | Written by Howard Skaist | 18 comments
| Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Posted in: America Invents Act, Authors, IP News, IPWatchdog.com Articles, Patent Reform, Patents

As nearly everyone in the United States “Patent World” is likely aware of by now, on Friday, September 16, 2011, President Obama signed the patent reform legislation recently passed by Congress. The law, therefore, is legally in force, although different provisions have different effective dates. The overall bill is, of course, extremely complex and has many different of facets.

This post is focused on specific aspects of “new 102,” which legally has an effective date of March 16, 2013. Even with limiting the topic of this post to new 102, enough complexity is presented that it would not be possible to discuss in any meaningful way all the changes with which one should be familiar. In other words, there are many potential traps for the unwary; however, the two discussed below seem to me to be particularly pernicious.



The America Invents Act – How it All Went Down

Posted: Tuesday, Sep 20, 2011 @ 3:30 pm | Written by Manus Cooney | 4 comments
| Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in: Authors, Congress, IP News, IPWatchdog.com Articles, Patent Reform, Patents

On Friday, September 16, 2011, President Obama signed into law “The America Invents Act” (“AIA”) which passed the Senate on September 8, 2011, by a vote of 89-9. The AIA passed the House of Representatives on June 23rd by a vote of 304-117. The measure, which is the product of a seven-years-long legislative battle among patent policy stakeholders, changes how patents are obtained and enforced in the United States. Important reforms to patent law are incorporated into the AIA and, just as significantly, several controversial proposed changes were deleted from the AIA before final passage.

Starting with President Obama’s State of the Union Address in January, where he made innovation and job creation key elements of his speech and specifically embraced passage of patent reform as a means of addressing both issues, patent reform was well positioned to be enacted in 2011. Moreover, Congress was desperate for legislative accomplishments in an environment where partisan differences, a weak economy, and government fiscal concerns dominated. Longstanding pro-reform coalitions and associations continued to expend considerable resources on the bill. Passage was deemed virtually assured when the Chairmen of the Judiciary Committees – Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) – essentially agreed this summer on a common piece of legislation. But, as explained below, nothing’s ever as simple as it seems in Washington.