Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

U.S. ARMY ARMAMENT RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT & ENGINEERING CENTER (ARDEC) Presented to: Federal Laboratory Consortium Northeast Region 25 Feb 2014 Mr. Tim.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "U.S. ARMY ARMAMENT RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT & ENGINEERING CENTER (ARDEC) Presented to: Federal Laboratory Consortium Northeast Region 25 Feb 2014 Mr. Tim."— Presentation transcript:

1 U.S. ARMY ARMAMENT RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT & ENGINEERING CENTER (ARDEC) Presented to: Federal Laboratory Consortium Northeast Region 25 Feb 2014 Mr. Tim Ryan Chief, Technology Transfer & International Cooperation AMERICAINVENTSACT

2 2 AIA Summary of Changes AIA signed into law by President Obama on Sep 16, 2011; variety of effective dates depending on provisions Conversion from “First to Invent” to modified “First to File” system effective Mar 16, 2013; First inventor to file receives the patent Grace Period Exception to prior art New review procedures of issued patents move validity challenges from the courts to the patent office Derivation proceedings Accelerated processing procedures Best mode defense

3 3 AIA Summary of Changes (cont’d) Broadens prior art definition to “public knowledge” available anywhere in the world Some fees increase, some decrease; 75% discount for micro entities Subject matter restrictions: tax processes and human organism Prior commercial use defense to infringement Disallowance of a single suit against multiple unrelated defendants (makes trolling more difficult) Repeal of Statutory Invention Registrations Electronic Filing Incentives Consult your IP attorney Consult your IP attorney

4 4 AIA Enactment Timeline Reexamination transition for threshold Tax strategies are deemed within prior art Best mode Human organism prohibition OED statute of limitations Day of Enactment Sept 16, 2011 Prioritized Examination 15% transition Surcharge 10 Days Sept 26, 2011 Reserve FundElectronic filing incentive Inventor’s oath/declaration Preissuance submission Supplemental examination Citation of prior art in a patent file Inter partes review Post-grant review Transitional post-grant review program for covered business method patents First inventor to file Derivation proceedings Repeal of statutory invention registration New patent fees Micro entity discount Oct 1, Days Nov 15, Months Sept 16, Months Mar 2013 Provisions are enacted Charts 4-13 Reference: America Invents Act Roadshow, Mar 2013, USPTO Janet Gongala, Patent Reform Coordinator

5 5 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1): Prior Public Disclosures as Prior Art 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) precludes a patent if a claimed invention was, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention: o patented; o described in a printed publication; o in public use; o on sale; or o otherwise available to the public

6 6 In Public Use or On Sale Does not include pre-AIA geographic limitation –U se or sale may occur anywhere in the world Does not include pre-AIA treatment of secret sale as prior art –S ale activity must have been available to the public

7 7 Two Exceptions to 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)Prior Art In brief– 102(b)(1)(A): A grace period disclosure of the inventor’s work is not prior art to the inventor 102(b)(1)(B): A disclosure of the inventor’s work shields the inventor from the prior art effect of a third party’s subsequent grace period disclosure Note that the 102(b)(1) exceptions pertain to the 102(a)(1) disclosures, which may be prior art as of the date they are publicly available

8 8 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(1)(A) Exception: Grace Period Disclosure of Inventor’s Work First exception: A disclosure made one year or less before the effective filing date of the claimed invention shall not be prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) if: the disclosure was made by: –the inventor or joint inventor; or –another who obtained the subject matter directly or indirectly from the inventor or joint inventor

9 9 Example 1: Exception in 102(b)(1)(A) Taylor publishes X Taylor files patent application claiming X July 1, 2013 July 1, 2014 Inventor Taylor’s Grace Period Taylor’s publication is not available as prior art against Taylor’s application because of the exception under 102(b)(1)(A) for a grace period disclosure by an inventor.

10 10 Example 2: Exception in 102(b)(1)(A) Smith publishes X Taylor files patent application claiming X July 1, 2013 July 1, 2014 Inventor Taylor’s Grace Period Smith’s publication would be prior art to Taylor under 102(a)(1) if it does not fall within any exception in 102(b)(1). However, if Smith obtained subject matter X from Taylor, then it falls into the 102(b)(1)(A) exception as a grace period disclosure obtained from the inventor, and is not prior art to Taylor.

11 11 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(1)(B) Exception: Grace Period Intervening Disclosure by Third Party Second exception: A disclosure made one year or less before the effective filing date of the claimed invention shall not be prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) if: the subject matter disclosed was, before such disclosure, publicly disclosed by: –the inventor or joint inventor; or –another who obtained the subject matter directly or indirectly from the inventor or joint inventor

12 12 “The Subject Matter” For the 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(1)(B) exception to apply: –the subject matter in the prior disclosure must be the same as that which is later publicly disclosed –the mode of prior disclosure by the inventor need not be the same as the mode of later disclosure by another –verbatim disclosures are not required

13 13 Example 3: Exception in 102(b)(1)(B) Taylor publishes X Taylor files patent application claiming X July 1, 2013 July 1, 2014 Inventor Taylor’s Grace Period Smith’s publication is not prior art because of the exception under 102(b)(1)(B) for a grace period intervening disclosure by a third party. Taylor’s publication is not prior art because of the exception under 102(b)(1)(A) for a grace period disclosure by the inventor. If Taylor’s disclosure had been before the grace period, it would be prior art against his own application. However, it would still render Smith inapplicable as prior art. Smith publishes X

14 14 Why File Before Disclosure* Considering that by publishing first you can win in above examples, why wouldn’t you rush to publish and then file in the year grace period? MANY REASONS –Protect potentially valuable foreign rights –Do not count on expensive, unpredictable derivation proceedings –Later publisher/applicant can be prior art if NOT same subject matter –What if change in your invention between publication and filing –Non-Enabling disclosure is not prior art BEST PRACTICE: File BEFORE Disclosure * Reference: Gordon & Rees LLP, 2011 America Invents Act Patent Reform, Susan B. Meyer, J.D.

15 15 AIA Help HELP-AIA ( ) t

16 16 Questions?


Download ppt "U.S. ARMY ARMAMENT RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT & ENGINEERING CENTER (ARDEC) Presented to: Federal Laboratory Consortium Northeast Region 25 Feb 2014 Mr. Tim."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google