how will the america invents act (aia) change the way we protect american imagineering?
DESCRIPTION
HOW WILL THE AMERICA INVENTS ACT (AIA) CHANGE THE WAY WE PROTECT AMERICAN IMAGINEERING?. April 24, 2012. Disney ’ s Grand Californian Hotel. Michael A. Guiliana. AIA Makes 3 Major Changes. AIA Changes. Consider…. “ First-to-File ” Eliminates Interferences Post Grant Oppositions. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
HOW WILL THE AMERICA INVENTS ACT (AIA) CHANGE THE WAY WE PROTECT AMERICAN
IMAGINEERING? Michael A. Guiliana
April 24, 2012Disney’s Grand Californian Hotel
2© 2012 Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear, LLP all rights reserved.
AIA Makes 3 Major Changes
1. “First-to-File”
2. Eliminates Interferences
3. Post Grant Oppositions
• Accelerate Patent Filing Process
• Segregate Patent Applications re March 16, 2013 Deadline
• Last Call for Interferences
• Revise Pre-Litigation Checklist with Post Grant PTO Options
• Consider Monitoring Policy
AIA Changes Consider…
3© 2012 Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear, LLP all rights reserved.
Patent Reform – what needed reforming?
What are YOUR thoughts?
4© 2012 Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear, LLP all rights reserved.
Kappos on Keeping Up With the Speed of Business
5© 2012 Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear, LLP all rights reserved.
Kappos on Litigation
6© 2012 Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear, LLP all rights reserved.
Is this what needed reform?!
7© 2012 Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear, LLP all rights reserved.
Patent Monetization Landscape – Key Players
8© 2012 Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear, LLP all rights reserved.
Patent Applications Under First-to-Invent
Inventor A InventsIDF
Decision to Draft and File Patent App. Filing Date
Committee Review of IDF• Searching• Market Analysis
Patent Filing Lag(Can Be Long)
USPTO Procedures
Inventor B InventsFiles Patent Fast
“Swear Behind”(37 CFR § 1.131)
-or-Interference
INVENTOR A WINS!
9© 2012 Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear, LLP all rights reserved.
Patent Applications Under First-to-FileStarting March 16, 2013
Inventor A InventsIDF
Decision to Draft and File Patent App. Filing Date
Committee Review of IDF• Searching• Market Analysis
USPTO Procedures
Inventor B InventsFiles Patent Fast
INVENTOR B WINS!
“Swear Behind”(37 CFR § 1.131)
-or-Interference
Patent Filing Lag(Can Be Long)
10© 2012 Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear, LLP all rights reserved.
Preparations for First-to-File System
Inventor A InventsIDF and:
• Files Patent App., or• Files Provisional App.
Decision to Draft and File Patent App. Filing Date
Committee Review of IDF• Searching• Market Analysis
USPTO Procedures
Inventor B InventsFiles Patent Fast
INVENTOR A WINS!
Patent Filing Lag(Can Be Long)
• Reduce Your Patent Lag•Provisional Applications - IDFs•Patent Application Training
11© 2012 Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear, LLP all rights reserved.
Preparations for First-to-File SystemReducing Patent Filing Lag / File First – Vet Later• Train R&D Staff to Assist Writing Patent Applications– File IDFs as Provisional Applications
• Segregate Unnecessary Information– PTO Fee < $100– 10 Months Available for:
• Searching• Market Research• Prototyping• Foreign Filing Decisions
12© 2012 Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear, LLP all rights reserved.
Invention Tracking – Prior Use DefensePrior Commercial Use is a Defense to ANY Patent
Infringement• Invention Disclosure Forms are Vehicle for Capturing
Evidence– Revise IDFs to include “Date of First Commercialization”– Keep IDF Open Until DFC Established (even if no patent
filing)– Preserve All IDFs (even if no patent filing)
• Defense Potentially Available Even if Commercial Use of Invention is Trade Secret
13© 2012 Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear, LLP all rights reserved.
Simplified Product Marking• 35 U.S.C. § 287(a) – Virtual Marking
– The word ‘patent’ or the abbreviation ‘pat.’ AND– A website address “accessible to the public without
charge”• Must associate “the patented article with the number
of the patent”
14© 2012 Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear, LLP all rights reserved.
Challenging Patent Applications in the PTO – New Reasons to MonitorChallenging Pending Patent Applications• “Third Party Submissions” 35 U.S.C. § 122(e)(2)
– TP Can Submit Patent/Published App., Printed Pub. +– Argument– Deadline – A Very Narrow Window:
• Before Allowance, AND• Within 6 Months After Publication, or• Before First Rejection
• Monitoring is the ONLY Way to Identify Opportunities
15© 2012 Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear, LLP all rights reserved.
Challenging Patents in the PTO – More Reasons to MonitorChallenging Issued Patents• Post Grant Review:
– Requester can use ANY Prior Art/Any Basis for Invalidity• (except failure to disclose Best Mode)
– Deadline: • 9 Months from Issuance• Monitoring Only Practical Way to Identify
Opportunities– Appealable/Estoppel
16© 2012 Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear, LLP all rights reserved.
Challenging Patents in the PTO – More Reasons to MonitorChallenging Issued Patents• Inter Partes Review:
– Prior Art Limited to Printed Publications/Patents– At Least 9 Months After Issuance/After Post Grant Review– Appealable + Estoppel
17© 2012 Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear, LLP all rights reserved.
Best Mode Requirement – Dead?• Disclosure of Best Mode Still Required 35 U.S.C. § 112, 1st • Failure to Disclose Best Mode No Longer Grounds for
Invalidity– 35 U.S.C. 282
• Not Clear if Duty of Candor to the PTO will Have Any Effect– Patent Attorney Subject to OED– Possibly No Recourse Against Inventor or Patent Owner¶
©2012 Knobbe Martens, Olson & Bear, LLP all rights reserved.©2012 Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear, LLP all rights reserved.
18
Thank You!
Michael A. Guiliana [email protected]