Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences May 15, 2008 1 Interference Practice Q&A James T. Moore Administrative Patent Judge 571-272-9797.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Inter Partes Reexamination Appeals

Advertisements

The John Marshall Law School 57th Annual Intellectual Property Law Conference Post-Grant Procedures Michael P. Tierney Lead Administrative Patent Judge.

First Action Interview Pilot Program Overview. Pilot Program Objectives Promote personal interviews prior to issuance of a first Office action on the.

Guide to Brief Preparation Local Rule 7 sets out the requirements. Briefs must be typed and double-spaced. An original and four copies shall be filed.

Webinar: Request for Comments on AIA Trial Proceedings Before the PTAB July 29, Scott Boalick, Vice Chief Judge (Acting) Patent Trial and Appeal.

Michael Neas Supervisor Office of PCT Legal Administration

The Appeals Process by Gina chandler

Representative Rejections (two minor suggestions) Matthew A. Smith Foley & Lardner LLP at the United States Patent & Trademark Office.

USPTO Madrid Protocol Seminar on Tips for Filing International Applications and Maintaining International Registrations MPU Review of International Application.

Biotechnology/Chemical/Pharmaceutical Customer Partnership Meeting October 8, 2002 William F. Smith Administrative Patent Judge Board of Patent Appeals.

ARGUING YOUR APPEAL BEFORE A PANEL OF THE BPAI IN AN INTER PARTES REEXAMINATION Kevin F. Turner Administrative Patent Judge Board of Patent Appeals & Interferences.

Administrative Trials

Appeal Practice Before Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

Prosecution Group Luncheon Patents August Proposed First-To-File Rules Add definitions in AIA to Rules Declarations for removing references based.

Q. TODD DICKINSON EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AMERICAN INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW ASSOCIATION (AIPLA) USPTO PUBLIC MEETING JULY 20, 2010 AIPLA Comments: Enhanced.

Determination of Obviousness Practice Under the Genus-Species Guidelines and In re Ochiai; In re Brouwer Sreeni Padmanabhan & James Wilson Supervisory.

Appellate Procedure and Petition Practice By: Michael A. Leonard II.

Law and Motion. A Motion is an application to the court requesting some kind of relief or court order May be oral or written General types of motions.

Green Technology Petition Pilot Robert W. Bahr. 2 Green Tech: Discussion Points 1. Authority and Overview: resources / overview 2.Petition Requirement:

Appeal Practice Refresher Office of Patent Training.

The U.S. Patent System is Changing – A Summary of the New Patent Reform Law.

December 8, Changes to Patent Fees Under the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2005 (H.R. 4818)(upon enactment) and 35 U.S.C. 103(c) as Amended by.

February 19, Recent Changes and Developments in USPTO Practice Prepared by: Office of Patent Legal Administration (OPLA) Robert J. Spar, DirectorJoni.

BCP Partnership Meeting March 15, Jeffrey V. Nase and Richard Torczon Administrative Patent Judges

Remy Yucel Director, CRU (571) Central Reexamination Unit and the AIA.

November 29, Global Intellectual Property Academy Advanced Patents Program Kery Fries, Senior Legal Advisor Mark Polutta, Senior Legal Advisor Office.

Judgment on Appeal The Court prepares, not the party.

1 LAW DIVISION PATENT DIVISION TRADEMARK & DESIGN DIVISION ACCOUNTING & AUDITING DIVISION YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING.

Christopher J. Fildes Fildes & Outland, P.C. Derivation Proceedings and Prior User Rights.

Submitting Mid-term Grades Tutorial v21 Submitting Mid-term Grades Tutorial.

1 1 AIPLA Firm Logo American Intellectual Property Law Association EMERGING TRENDS IN INTER PARTES REVIEW PRACTICE TOM ENGELLENNER Pepper Hamilton, LLP.

August 28, 2009 Federal Emergency Management Agency Public Assistance Arbitration Process.

Post-Grant & Inter Partes Review Procedures Presented to AIPPI, Italy February 10, 2012 By Joerg-Uwe Szipl Griffin & Szipl, P.C.

Practice Before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences.

1 Rules of Practice Before the BPAI in Ex Parte Appeals 73 Fed. Reg (June 10, 2008) Effective December 10, Fed. Reg (June 10, 2008)

The Patent Lawyers Club of Washington May 29, Michael R. Fleming Chief Administrative Patent Judge Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

Supreme Court civil pre-trial procedures: an overview

After Final Practice Linda M. Saltiel June 2, 2015.

© 2005 by Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved.1 CALIFORNIA CIVIL LITIGATION APPEALS.

Summary Judgment and Summary Adjudication LA 310.

Overview Validity of patent hinges on novelty, utility, and non-obviousness Utility generally not an issue Pre-suit investigation focuses on infringement,

Patent Prosecution May PCT- RCE Zombie 371 National Stage PCT Applications –Not Allowed to file an RCE until signed inventor oath/declaration is.

New Ex Parte Appeal Rules Patent and Trademark Practice Group Meeting January 26, 2012.

© COPYRIGHT DICKSTEIN SHAPIRO LLP. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Post Grant Proceedings Before the USPTO and Litigation Strategies Under the AIA Panelists:David.

QualityDefinition.PPACMeeting AdlerDraft 1 1 Improving the Quality of Patents Marc Adler PPAC meeting June 18, 2009.

Colorado Bar Association January 22, Michael R. Fleming – Chief Administrative Patent Judge Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

Administrative Law The Enactment of Rules and Regulations.

Chris Fildes FILDES & OUTLAND, P.C. IP Practice in Japan Committee Pre-Meeting AIPLA Annual Meeting, October 20, 2015 USPTO PILOT PROGRAMS 1 © AIPLA 2015.

Derivation Proceedings Gene Quinn Patent Attorney IPWatchdog.com March 27 th, 2012.

HEI/OCAN College Access Program Data Submissions.

Report to the AIPLA’s IP Practice in Japan Committee January 22, 2012 USPTO Appeal Process: Appeal Strategies and New Rules Presented by: Stephen S. Wentsler.

PTAB Litigation 2016 Part 6 – Patent Owner Response 1.

Using the Patent Review Processing System (PRPS) for Post Grant Pilot Applications How to identify relevant information in AIA proceedings at the Patent.

PTAB Litigation 2016 Part 5 – Motions Practice, Discovery, and Trial Management Issues 1.

1 TOPIC III - PATENT INVALIDATION PROCEDURES EU-CHINA WORKSHOP ON THE CHINESE PATENT LAW HARBIN, SEPTEMBER 2008 Dr. Gillian Davies.

Recent Developments in Obtaining and Enforcing Intellectual Property Rights in Nanocomposites Michael P. Dilworth February 28, 2012.

PTAB Litigation 2016 Part 3 – The Patent Owner Preliminary Response 1.

GETTING STARTED: Notices of appeal & the initial appellate documents.

TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD OVERVIEW

USPTO Appeal Process: Appeal Strategies and New Rules

PATENT LAW TREATY Gena Jones Senior Legal Advisor

PTAB Bootcamp: Nuts and Bolts of IPRs, PGRs, and CBMs

PPH at the Israel Patent Office

PTAB Litigation 2016 Part 8 – Oral Hearing

Prosecution Luncheon Patent March 2017

Appeals in Public Retirement Cases

PTAB Litigation 2016 Part 4 – The Institution Decision

Appellate Practice Basics

Panel Discussion on Hearings Case Management Projects

The Other 66 Percent: Appeals Before the PTAB

Presentation transcript:

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences May 15, Interference Practice Q&A James T. Moore Administrative Patent Judge

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences May 15, I. Interference Web Portal Questions 1. Could we get an update on the web pilot program—from Judge Moore's standpoint and from the standpoint of the Trial Section APJs?

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences May 15, I. Interference Web Portal Questions 2. Why is there no guidance on the Interference Web Portal page of the metes and bounds of its the Interference Web Portal database contents, by date, interference number, or any other metric?

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences May 15, I. Interference Web Portal Questions 3. Why is there no guidance on the Interference Web Portal page on how to use the Interference Web Portal ?

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences May 15, I. Interference Web Portal Questions 4. Why does the Interference Web Portal not accept wild cards for any search fields? 5. Why does the interference Web Portal not return all records when the search field is left blank?

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences May 15, I. Interference Web Portal Questions 6. Why does the interference Web Portal not provide a search by date fields, such as date of declaration, date of application? 7. Why does the interference Web Portal not provide a search by APJ?

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences May 15, I. Interference Web Portal Questions 8. Problems with the web portal for efiling occur from time to time. If the Board adopts efiling via the web portal for all interferences (if all aren't already in the pilot), will the parties be authorized ahead of time to file via when the portal is experiencing difficulties, or will they need to continue to try to contact Judge Moore?

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences May 15, I. Interference Web Portal Questions 9. Can the Board update the list of Interference Practice Specialists on their webpage (or at least provide us with an updated list)? It says it was last updated in October, and several months ago two of the listed Examiners told me they were no longer handling interferences.

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences May 15, II. Interference Practice Questions 10. Can a party file an opposition or reply to a request for rehearing of an entry of judgment, as a matter of right?

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences May 15, II. Interference Practice Questions 11. How many interferences were decided during the last fiscal year by the Board's making decisions on priority? 12. How many interferences were decided during the last fiscal year by the Board's making decisions on issues other than priority.

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences May 15, II. Interference Practice Questions 13. It appears that petitions under 37 CFR 41.3 are rare. Under what circumstances has the Board entertained such petitions in interferences?

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences May 15, II. Interference Practice Questions 14. Does 135(b)(2) apply to the actual filing date or effective filing date?

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences May 15, II. Interference Practice Questions 15. What is the average pendency between the IPS's memo/analysis and the Notice Declaring Interference?

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences May 15, II. Interference Practice Questions 16. When is live testimony appropriate? (E.G., live cross examination before the panel).

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences May 15, II. Interference Practice Questions 17. Do the Judges watch deposition videos? 18. Under what circumstances?

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences May 15, II. Interference Practice Questions 19. When providing the Motions List (SO 204) that a party seeks authorization to file, does it matter whether the party describes a particular motion as "substantive" or "responsive" or "miscellaneous?"

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences May 15, II. Interference Practice Questions 20. If you notice an error -- what amounts to a typographical error or a ministerial error -- in either the Count or one of your claims, what type of motion should be filed to correct it? Substantive or miscellaneous?

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences May 15, II. Interference Practice Questions 21. The SO doesn't provide much detail as to what's required in a motions list, and the Trial Section APJs seem to differ in how much detail they require in a motion list. Could the Board provide examples of the required level of detail for a motions list, as the SO does for motions, oppositions, replies, and appendices? The Board views the motions list as a tool for planning the course of an interference, but having more guidance would make the initial conference call more productive.

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences May 15, II. Interference Practice Questions 22. Can the Board discuss whether interference cases are expedited within the PTO? For example, if a case is filed to provoke an interference, will examination of the application be expedited and the turn around time decreased once a case gets to the Board?

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences May 15, II. Interference Practice Questions 23. Can the Board discuss the current procedures for obtaining transcripts from oral argument prior to a final decision?

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences May 15, II. Interference Practice Questions 24. Can the Board discuss whether it continues to try to expedite issuing decisions?

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences May 15, III. Recent BPAI Precedential Decisions Ex parte Kubin, 83 USPQ2d 1410 (BPAI 2007) (expanded panel) (obvious to try). Ex parte Smith, 83 USPQ2d 1509 (BPAI 2007) (expanded panel) (predictable use of prior art elements according to their established functions). Ex parte Catan, 83 USPQ2d 1569 (BPAI 2007) (expanded panel) (precise teaching of teaching, suggestion or motivation not required).

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences May 15, III. Recent BPAI Precedential Decisions Ex parte Fu, Appeal No , 2008 WL (BPAI March 31, 2008) (expanded panel) (one skilled in the art would anticipate success in substituting one species for its genus where the genus contains a limited number of species, citing KSR).