PharmaPatents Timely Insight on Emerging Legal Developments

Tag Archives: Leahy-Smith America Invents Act

USPTO Rules Eliminate Inter Partes Review Dead Zone

Posted in Patent Reform; Patent Trials; USPTO Proposed Rule Changes

On March 25, 2013, the USPTO published final rule changes to “Implement the Technical Corrections to the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act as to Inter Partes Review.” The rule changes have an effective date of March 25, 2013, and relate to statutory changes with an effective date of January 14, 2013.

The Dead Zone

The AIA created two new procedures for challenging a patent within the USPTO: Post Grant Review and Inter Partes Review. As enacted, Post Grant Review only can be requested within the first nine months after a patent grants, and Inter Partes Review only could be requested thereafter. However, Post Grant Review only is available for patents examined under the first-inventor-to-file provisions of the AIA (which only apply to certain applications filed on or after March 16, 2013). This created a “dead zone” for patents that are not subject to Post Grant Review, because they could not be challenged within the USPTO within the first nine months after grant or reissue.

The AIA Technical Corrections Act

The AIA Technical Corrections Act stemmed from HR 6621, and eliminated the Inter Partes Review dead zone by providing that the nine month time period restriction does not apply to patents that are were not examined under the first-inventor-to-file provisions of the AIA. Thus, under the AIA Technical Corrections Act, an Inter Partes Review proceeding to challenge a “first-to-invent” patent or reissue can be brought anytime once the patent or reissue is issued.

By the terms of the AIA Technical Corrections Act, these statutory changes took effect on January 14, 2013 (the date of enactment) and apply to proceedings commenced on or after that date.

The USPTO Rule Change

To implement these statutory changes, the USPTO has amended 37 CFR § 42.102(a) to read as follows:

(a) A petition for inter partes review of a patent must be filed after the later of the following dates, where applicable:
(1) If the patent is a patent described in section 3(n)(1) of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, the date that is nine months after the date of the grant of the patent;
(2) If the patent is a patent that is not described in section 3(n)(1) of the Leahy-Smith American Invents Act, the date of the grant of the patent; or
(3) If a post-grant review is instituted as set forth in subpart C of this part, the date of the termination of such post-grant review.

A “patent that is not described in section 3(n)(1) of the Leahy-Smith American Invents Act,” is a patent that was not examined under the first-inventor-to-file provisions of the AIA, the applicability of which is set forth in section 3(n)(1) of the AIA. Using the short-hand used in the Federal Register Notice, a “patent that is not described in section 3(n)(1) of the Leahy-Smith American Invents Act,” is a “first-to-invent” patent.

No Notice And Comment Period

As noted above, the USPTO published the final rule changes on March 25, 2013 and the rule changes have an effective date of March 25, 2013. The USPTO explained why this rule change was not subject to a notice and comment period:

Good cause exists to make these procedural changes without prior notice and opportunity for comment and to be effective immediately so as to avoid inconsistencies between regulations and the AIA Technical Corrections Act.

An Important Correction

This correction could be important to patents that may be involved in litigation, because the Inter Partes Review statute requires that a petition for Inter Partes Review be brought within one year after the petitioner has been served with a complaint alleging infringement. Without the correction, an accused infringer would have to wait until nine months after grant to petition for Inter Partes Review, even if  the one year clock was running.

Preserving First-To-Invent Status Under The America Invents Act

Posted in Patent Reform

Now that the first-inventor-to-file provisions of the America Invents Act (AIA) have taken effect, stakeholders should understand how to preserve the first-to-invent status of patent applications that were filed before March 16, 2013.Continue reading this entry

Maximizing The Effect Of Patent Applications As Prior Art Under The AIA

Posted in Patent Reform

Now that we are less than one month away from implementation of the First-Inventor-To-File provisions of the America Invents Act (AIA), stakeholders are considering whether to file new patent applications now, to secure examination under the current First-To-Invent patent system, or wait until March 16, 2013, so that the applications will be governed by the new U.S. patent laws. While there are a few situations where delaying filing could be advantageous, stakeholders do not need to wait to file their patent applications until March 16, 2013 in order to maximize their prior art effect.Continue reading this entry

A First Look At The Final First Inventor To File Rules

Posted in Patent Reform

The USPTO’s final First Inventor To File rules and Examination Guidelines were published in the February 14, 2013 edition of the Federal Register. While many of the final rules are identical to the proposed rules, there are some important changes to note.Continue reading this entry

A Look At The Technical Amendments To The America Invents Act (AIA) Made By HR 6621

Posted in Patent Reform

On January 14, 2013, President Obama signed HR 6621 into law. The title of HR 6621 is “To correct and improve certain provisions of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act,” but it also makes changes to other provisions of U.S. patent law, including the Patent Term Adjustment (PTA) provisions. This article provides an overview of the substantive changes to the AIA embodied in this law.Continue reading this entry

USPTO Announces New, Higher USPTO Patent Fees

Posted in Patent Office Practice

The USPTO has published the new patent fee structure that it is implementing pursuant to its fee-setting authority under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA). While some patent prosecution fees are decreasing, most large entities will see their total patent prosecution fees increase.  The majority of the new USPTO patent fees will take effect on March 19, 2013, but some will not take effect until January 14, 2014. Continue reading this entry

Countdown To The Ides Of March

Posted in Patent Reform

As of today, we are two months from March 15, 2013–the last day to secure an effective filing date under the current “first to invent” patent system. While we still are waiting for the USPTO to publish its final rules implementing the first-to-file provisions of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA), most of those rules will come into play after an application is filed.  For the time being, inventors and applicants should be considering whether patent applications that may be ready for filing should be filed before or after the effective date of the first-to-file laws.  This article provides a non-comprehensive, big picture review of the changes that take effect on March 16, 2013. Continue reading this entry

House, Senate Pass Changes To America Invents Act And Patent Term Adjustment

Posted in Patent Reform; Patent Term Adjustment

The Senate has passed a modified version of HR 6621, which focuses on changes “[t]o correct and improve certain provisions of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act” and also includes other provisions unrelated to the AIA, such as those impacting Patent Term Adjustment (PTA). The President is expected to sign the bill soon, and it will take effect on the date of enactment, unless otherwise provided.

The AIA Changes

HR 6621 makes several “technical amendments” to the AIA, some simply correcting “scrivener’s errors” and others making more substantive changes.

Inter Partes Review

One of the most significant changes in HR 6621 closes the Inter Partes Review (IPR) “dead zone.” The original IPR statute provides that IPR cannot be requested within the first 9 months of a patent’s grant date. This time period will complement the time period for Post Grant Review (PGR), once PGR is available because PGR only can be requested within 9 months of a patent’s grant date. But, PGR only is available against certain business method patents and patents examined under the first-to-file version of 35 USC § 102, which does not take effect until March 16, 2013. Thus, under the original IPR statute, patents granted now cannot be challenged in an inter partes USPTO proceeding until they have been in force for 9 months.

HR 6621 eliminates this “dead zone” by providing that the 9-months-from-grant requirement does not apply to patents that are not examined under the first-to-file version of 35 USC § 102. (Congress does not shy away from double negatives!)

HR 6621 also eliminates a similar “dead zone” for reissue patents, by providing that the 9-months-from-grant requirement does not apply to reissue patents.  

Inventor’s Oath/Declaration

HR 6621 changes the time period for filing an executed inventor’s oath/declaration (or substitute statement) from “by allowance” to “no later than the date on which the issue fee .. . paid.” This will greatly simply allowance procedures, and will permit the USPTO to issue a Notice of Allowance even when an executed inventor’s oath/declaration has not yet been filed.

Advice Of Counsel

HR 6621 provides that the section of the AIA deeming that evidence of any failure to obtain “advice of counsel” cannot be used to establish willfulness or intent to induce infringement apply to “any civil action commenced on or after the date of enactment” of HR 6621.

Derivation Proceedings

HR 6621 clarifies the deadline for bringing a derivation proceeding, and provides that such a proceeding must be brought within one year of the publication or grant of a relevant claim in the earlier-filed application.  This is consistent with how the USPTO had interpreted the original language of the derivation statute.

HR 6621 also defines “earlier application” and re-writes much of the derivation statute in terms of the “earlier application.”

Interferences

HR 6621 clarifies that the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) and Federal Circuit can hear appeals of interferences commenced after the effective date of the AIA’s amendments to § 135(a).

Patent Term Adjustment Provisions

HR 6621 includes the changes to the Patent Term Adjustment statute that I discussed in this article, including changes that I think may be problematic. 

In his speech providing a “section-by-section summary” of HR 6621, Rep. Lamar Smith expressed his views that the district court decision in Exelixis v. Kappos (which I wrote about here) will cause “absurd and undesirable results” that will undermine Congressional goals in adopting a 20-year patent term. (The USPTO has appealed the Exelixis decision.)

Pending, Unpublished Pre-GATT Patent Applications

As I wrote previously, HR 6621 was amended to eliminate the controversial provisions that effectively would have eliminated the term of pending, unpublished pre-GATT patent applications, and instead would have required the USPTO to issue a report on such applications.  The Senate took that revision one step further and removed all provisions relating to pre-GATT patent applications.

Effective Date of HR 6621

The default effective date of HR 6621 is its date of enactment, and it will apply “to proceedings commenced on or after” that date, except where it states otherwise.

More Changes Ahead?

In his speech providing a “section-by-section summary” of HR 6621, Rep. Lamar Smith indicated that further changes to the AIA may be under consideration. In particular, he indicated that Congress is considering changing the “raised or could have been raised” PGR estoppel provisions. Additionally, Congress clearly wants to address the problem of pending pre-GATT applications, which is discussed in more detail in this article.

USPTO Offers Guidance On Supplemental Examination

Posted in Patent Office Practice; Patent Reform

The USPTO has published “Tips for Filing a Compliant Supplemental Examination Request” on its AIA Implementation web page. According to the notice, the USPTO has received six requests for Supplemental Examination, but apparently not all of them complied with the USPTO’s rules. Luckily for patent owners, requests for Supplemental Examination are not made public unless and until they have been found to satisfy the filing date requirements. Thus, patent owners who file non-compliant requests have an opportunity to cure them before they are made public. The “tips” in the notice underscore the importance of following the rules to a “T,” and making it easy for the USPTO to determine why the “information” is being submitted and whether it is “relevant to the patent.”Continue reading this entry

The Limited Scope Of The New Derivation Proceedings

Posted in Patent Reform; USPTO Proposed Rule Changes

Under the first-to-file provisions of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA), the USPTO no longer will institute interference proceedings in order to determine who was the first person to invent a claimed invention. While an applicant will be able to petition the USPTO to institute a derivation proceeding, the statute and implementing regulations provide for such proceedings under only very limited circumstances.Continue reading this entry

USPTO Publishes Final Derivation Rules

Posted in Patent Office Practice; Patent Reform; USPTO Proposed Rule Changes

Although derivation proceedings only will be available for U.S. patent applications with an effective filing date on or after March 16, 2013, the USPTO already has published its final rules implementing the derivation provisions of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA). The final rules embody several changes and clarifications as compared to the proposed rules.Continue reading this entry

What Will Be Different On Monday? (The September 16, 2012 Patent Reform Changes)

Posted in Patent Office Practice; Patent Reform; USPTO Proposed Rule Changes

The next wave of U.S. patent reform changes embodied in the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act takes effect on Sunday, September 16, 2012. The following is a list of some of the things that will be different when we come to work on Monday. Because of the different effective date provisions, some of these changes will impact granted patents and/or pending patent applications, as well as new U.S. patent applications filed on or after September 16, 2012.Continue reading this entry

First To File Practice: An Alternative Interpretation Of The Grace Period Shielding Disclosure Exception

Posted in Patent Reform; USPTO Proposed Rule Changes

I was honored to participate in the USPTO’s First-Inventor-To-File Roundtable yesterday (September 6, 2012). One issue raised by several speakers was the USPTO’s proposed requirements for invoking what I refer to as the “grace period shielding disclosure” exception to prior art under the first-to-file provisions of the America Invents Act (“AIA”). In a previous article I highlighted the USPTO’s controversial interpretation set forth in the USPTO’s proposed examination guidelines. Here, I offer an alternative interpretation of 35 USC § 102(b)(1)(B). Continue reading this entry

First To File Practice: Commonly Owned Applications

Posted in Patent Reform; USPTO Proposed Rule Changes

This is the fourth article in my First-To-File Friday series. On each Friday in August, I am publishing an article that takes an in-depth look at one of the prior art exceptions of the first-to-file version of 35 USC § 102 which will apply to certain patent applications filed on or after March 16, 2013.

The USPTO has issued its proposed rules and proposed examination guidelines for implementing the first-to-file provisions of the America Invents Act (AIA), and will consider written comments received by October 5, 2012. In previous articles I have provided overviews of the proposed rules, the proposed examination guidelines, the proposed requirements for invoking the “grace period inventor disclosure” exception to prior art, the proposed requirements for invoking the “grace period non-inventor disclosure” exception to prior art, and the proposed requirements for invoking the “grace period shielding disclosure” exception to prior art. Here, I look at the expanded prior art exception for commonly owned patent applications.Continue reading this entry

USPTO To Permit Assignees To File And Prosecute Patent Applications

Posted in Patent Reform; USPTO Proposed Rule Changes

As set forth in the final rules published in the August 14, 2012 Federal Register, assignees will be able to file and prosecute U.S. patent applications filed on or after September 16, 2012. The USPTO’s rules implement changes to 35 USC § 118 embodied in the America Invents Act (AIA), and bring U.S. patent practice in line with most other countries that do not require inventors to be the “applicants” on patent applications. However, these rule changes apply only to U.S. applications filed under 35 USC § 111(a) on or after September 16, 2012, and U.S. national phase applications based on PCT applications filed under 35 USC § 363 on on or after September 16, 2012.

Continue reading this entry

First To File Practice: Grace Period Shielding Disclosures

Posted in Patent Reform; USPTO Proposed Rule Changes

This is the third article in my First-To-File Friday series. On each Friday in August, I am publishing an article that takes an in-depth look at one of the prior art exceptions of the first-to-file version of 35 USC § 102 which will apply to certain patent applications filed on or after March 16, 2013.

The USPTO has issued its proposed rules and proposed examination guidelines for implementing the first-to-file provisions of the America Invents Act (AIA), and will consider written comments received by October 5, 2012. In previous articles I have provided overviews of the proposed rules, the proposed examination guidelines, the proposed requirements for invoking the “grace period inventor disclosure” exception to prior art, and the proposed requirements for invoking the “grace period non-inventor disclosure” exception to prior art. Here, I look at the proposed requirements for invoking what I refer to as the “grace period shielding disclosure” exception to prior art.Continue reading this entry

An Overview Of The Final Patent Reform Rules Packages Effective September 16, 2012

Posted in Patent Reform; USPTO Proposed Rule Changes

On August 14, 2012, the USPTO published the final rule packages for implementing the patent reform changes that take effect September 16, 2012. Several colleagues and I prepared Legal News Alert articles which provide an overview of key changes embodied in the rules.

This article looks at some of the key provisions relating to an assignee’s ability to file and prosecute patent applications, changes to the inventor oath/declaration requirements, changes to reissue application practice, simplified procedures for correcting inventorship, the heightened importance of application data sheets, and the elimination of “without deceptive intent” requirements.

This article looks at the new rules for the new supplemental examination proceedings and pre-issuance submissions by third parties.

This article looks at the four rules packages which implement the new trial proceedings that will be conducted by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Board), including inter partes review, post-grant review, and the transitional program for covered business method patents.

Learning More About The Final Rules

We will be providing more in-depth reviews of the final rules packages on PharmaPatentsBlog over the next few weeks. In addition, as noted above, the USPTO is holding several AIA roadshows across the country in September, where USPTO representatives will explain the new rules.

Practitioners and applicants interested in the new patent trial proceedings also may want to register for and attend the Patent Nation Webinar program hosted by Foley & Lardner LLP on Monday, August 27, 2012.  This program will give attendees an opportunity to understand how interference and inter partes examination have influenced the new proceedings, to discuss how these new options may impact business strategies, and to learn proactive steps that can be taken now to prepare for the changes to come.  Scheduled featured guest speakers include Teresa Stanek Rea, Deputy Under Secretary of Commerce for IP and Deputy Director of the USPTO and James D. Smith, Chief Administrative Patent Judge, USPTO. Featured speakers from Foley & Lardner LLP include Matthew A. Smith, Partner and Chair, Patent Office Trials Practice, and Andrew S. Baluch, Special Counsel and Vice Chair, Patent Office Trials Practice.

USPTO Issues Final Rules For America Invents Act Provisions That Take Effect September 16, 2012

Posted in Patent Reform; Uncategorized; USPTO Proposed Rule Changes

As announced on the USPTO website, the final rules for the provisions of the America Invents Act (AIA) that take effect on September 16, 2012, will be published in the August 14, 2012 Federal Register. Pre-publication versions of the rules packages are available now in the Federal Register reading room. While I have not yet reviewed all of the final rules, it appears that the USPTO took public comments into consideration and made significant changes to some of the proposed rules. Applicants and practitioners should study the final rules packages and consider attending a USPTO “AIA roadshow,” where USPTO representatives will explain the new rules. Practitioners and applicants interested in the new patent trial proceedings also may want to register for and attend the Patent Nation Webinar program hosted by Foley & Lardner LLP on Monday, August 27, 2012.   Continue reading this entry

First To File Practice: Grace Period Non-Inventor Disclosures

Posted in Patent Reform; USPTO Proposed Rule Changes

This is the second article in my First-To-File Friday series. On each Friday in August, I am publishing an article that takes an in-depth look at one of the prior art exceptions of the first-to-file version of 35 USC § 102 which will apply to certain patent applications filed on or after March 16, 2013.

The USPTO has issued its proposed rules and proposed examination guidelines for implementing the first-to-file provisions of the America Invents Act (AIA), and will consider written comments received by October 5, 2012. In previous articles I have provided overviews of the proposed rules, the proposed examination guidelines, and the proposed requirements for invoking the “grace period inventor disclosure” exception to prior art. Here, I look at the proposed requirements for invoking what the USPTO refers to as the “grace period non-inventor disclosure” exception to prior art. Continue reading this entry

USPTO Reverses Course to Permit Anonymous Ex Parte Reexamination Requests

Posted in Patent Reform; Reexam; USPTO Proposed Rule Changes

Responding to public feedback, the USPTO announced that it has dropped a controversial proposal that would have required all requests for ex parte reexamination to identify the requester’s “real party in interest.”  The change is one of several new provisions in a Final Rule, released August 6, 2012, which implements a new estoppel provision in the America Invents Act (AIA) barring ex parte reexamination of a patent following the completion of an inter partes review or post-grant review.  Third-party requesters and patent owners alike will need to be familiar with the Final Rule which goes into effect on September 16, 2012.  Continue reading this entry

First To File Practice: Grace Period Inventor Disclosures

Posted in Patent Reform; USPTO Proposed Rule Changes

This is the first article in my First-To-File Friday series. On each Friday in August, I will publish an article that takes an in-depth look at one of the prior art exceptions of the first-to-file version of 35 USC § 102 which will apply to certain patent applications filed on or after March 16, 2013.

The USPTO has issued its proposed rules and proposed examination guidelines for implementing the first-to-file provisions of the America Invents Act (AIA), and will consider written comments received by October 5, 2012. In previous articles I have provided overviews of the proposed rules and the proposed examination guidelines. Here, I turn my attention to the specific requirements (as proposed) for invoking the “grace period inventor disclosure” exception to prior art. Continue reading this entry

A Sneak Peek At The USPTO’s Proposed First-To-File Rules

Posted in Patent Reform; USPTO Proposed Rule Changes

For a short time on Friday, July 20, 2012, the USPTO’s proposed rules to implement the first-to-file provisions of the America Invents Act (“AIA”) were available in the Federal Register’s “electronic Reading Room.” According to the USPTO’s AIA Implementation website, the USPTO temporarily withdrew the proposed rules in order “to enable the Federal Register to publish the first-inventor-to-file rulemaking at the same time as the first-inventor-to-file guidance document” that the USPTO plans to issue. Because this explanation suggests that the USPTO does not intend to change the substance of the proposed rules, I will proceed with my review and analysis of the proposed rules as pre-published.Continue reading this entry

USPTO Publishes Final Rules For Preissuance Submissions By Third Parties

Posted in Patent Reform; USPTO Proposed Rule Changes

The USPTO published the final rules to implement the Preissuance Submissions provisions of the America Invents Act in the July 17, 2012 Federal Register. The final rules add new 37 CFR § 1.290, revise 37 CFR § 1.291, and remove 37 CFR § 1.99 (the current rule relating to preissuance submissions) and 37 CFR § 1.292 (the current rule relating to public use proceedings). The rules take effect on September 16, 2012, and are applicable in principle to all pending patent applications. The final rules are similar to the proposed rules that were published in January, but there are some important differences and clarifications set forth in the final rulemaking.Continue reading this entry

Where We Stand On Patent Reform

Posted in Patent Reform

It has been nine months since President Obama signed the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act into law on September 16, 2011. In just under three months, the next phase of changes will take effect on September 16, 2012, and in just under nine months, the final phase of changes will take effect on March 16, 2013. Have you taken any steps to get ready yet? Continue reading this entry