Patent Trial and Appeal Board. State of the Board

Similar documents
What to Do When Facing a Patent Infringement Law Suit. Presented by: Robert W. Morris

Starting An AIA Post-Grant Proceeding

USPTO Implementation of the America Invents Act. Janet Gongola Patent Reform Coordinator Direct dial:

2016 ANALYSIS ON PTAB CONTESTED PROCEEDINGS

USPTO Basics for Small Business. Azam Khan Deputy Chief of Staff

reporter 2017 Analysis ON PTAB contested proceedings introduction

Paper 11 Tel: Entered: August 3, 2015 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD

Status Report: USPTO Implementation of the America Invents Act. Remy Yucel Director, Central Reexamination Unit (direct)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD. REDFIN CORPORATION Petitioner

How Will Patent Reform Affect the Software and Internet Industries? The Computer & Internet Lawyer December 2011

USPTO PROPOSES AIA-BASED PATENT FEE CHANGES

Practical and Effective Cost Containment in Patent Litigation

Applicants who meet the definition for small (50%) or micro entity (75%) discounts will continue to pay a reduced fee for the new patent fees.

Overview of the USPTO Appeal Process and Practice Tips

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Executive Summary: Patent Fee Proposal

AGENCY: United States Patent and Trademark Office, Commerce. SUMMARY: The United States Patent and Trademark Office (Office or USPTO)

CHAPTER 1. Overview of the AIA. Chapter Contents. The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, Pub. L. No , 125 Stat. 284 (2011). 2

, IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT SIGHTSOUND TECHNOLOGIES, LLC, Appellant, APPLE INC., Appellee.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Paper No Entered: May 3, 2018 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD

April 14, Statement of J Kyle Bass Chief Investment Officer, Hayman Capital Management, L.P.

Paper 9 Tel: Entered: April 15, 2015 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD

Doing Business in the United States: Practical Steps for Success in the World s Largest Life Sciences Market

VOL CONTENTS

Fitch Even IP Alert: USPTO Announces Final Rules and Examination Guidelines to Implement the Final Phase of the America Invents Act

Paper Entered: September 13, 2013 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD

Filed on behalf of Petitioner Corning Optical Communications RF, LLC

December 2, Via

November 2, Dear AIPPI National Groups:

AN OVERVIEW OF THE AMERICA INVENTS ACT (AIA):

Question FEE1000: How much is the fee for prioritized examination and when will it be effective?

USPTO REVISES PATENT TERM ADJUSTMENT RULES

Re-Examination Request: To File Or Not To File?

[NOTE: The following annotated sections of the C.F.R. are from BNA s Patent, Trademark, and Copyright Regulations,

APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO. 10/045,902 01/16/2002 Shunpei Yamazaki

Patenting in the Age of Crowdsourcing: An Expanded Opportunity for Third Party Participation

Paper Entered: May 12, 2015 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD

Case: Document: 23 Page: 1 Filed: 02/01/ (Serial No. 12/426,034) UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT

An Overview of USPTO Operations

Paper 23 Tel: Entered: July 29, 2014 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD

Implications of the America Invents Act for Income Tax Patent Valuations

ST CENTURY PATENT REFORM THE COALITION FOR Agenda for Patent Reform

President s Message. By Donna Meuth, Eisai Inc.

Case 4:10-cv TSH Document 1 Filed 07/09/10 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

52780 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 218 / Tuesday, November 14, 2017 / Rules and Regulations

no.21 NEWSLETTER The USPTO is flipping the switch on certain provisions of the America Invents Act on September 16, Are you ready?

Comments to the Patent Public Advisory Committee Public Hearing on the Proposed Patent Fee Schedule [Docket No. PTO-P ]

STATEMENT OF ANDREI IANCU UNDER SECRETARY OF COMMERCE FOR INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND DIRECTOR OF THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE

A Proposed Rule For En Banc PTAB Review

Paper Entered: April 21, 2014 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD

The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act: Innovation Issues

Lead Judge Michael Tierney, Covered Business Method Patent Review United States Patent and Trademark Office Alexandria, VA 22313

AGENCY: United States Patent and Trademark Office, Department of Commerce.

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD. INGURAN, LLC d/b/a SEXING TECHNOLOGIES, Petitioner

Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.

USPTO ISSUES PROPOSED PATENT FEE SCHEDULE

PATENT-ASSIGNMENT TRANSACTIONS BETWEEN BRAND-NAME DRUG COMPANIES AND NATIVE AMERICAN TRIBES WILL UNDERMINE A HEALTHY PATENT SYSTEM AND HARM PATIENTS

Information Disclosure to the USPTO: How Much Information is Required and What Constitutes a Reasonable Inquiry

RK Mailed: May 24, 2013

MAGISTRATE JUDGE MONA K. MAJZOUB SCHEDULING DOCUMENTS 3/28/2011

Busy Season. all year long. TRI Tax Resolution Institute. where your tax debt is your power!

30(b)(6) Depositions in Insurance Coverage and Bad Faith Litigation Preparing and Responding to Notices of Corporate Representative Depositions

Professional Responsibility and Practice Before the USPTO

A (800) (800)

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Case: 1:13-cv Document #: 59 Filed: 05/27/14 Page 1 of 9 PageID #:392

UNITED STATES TAX COURT WASHINGTON, DC ORDER AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION

Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A. Today s faculty features:

Before the. United States Patent and Trademark Office Department of Commerce

Case 2:17-cv CB Document 28 Filed 02/28/18 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

DOJ Official Says Acquisitions of Non-Essential Patents Are Reviewed Under the Same Standard as Essential Patents

Protest Procedure: A Primer

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE

Paper Entered: February 27, 2013 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD

Forward Pharma (NASDAQ:FWP) Corporate Update Jefferies 2017 Global Healthcare Conference. June 6, 2017

Case No UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT SECURE AXCESS, LLC,

Busy Season. all year long. TRI Tax Resolution Institute. where your tax debt is your power!

Priority Rights and AIA Drafting Error; Universities at Risk

Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD. CHICAGO MERCANTILE EXCHANGE, INC., Petitioner,

United States Markush Practice in Flux. Brian K. Lathrop, Ph.D., Esq. April 3, 2012

Subpart B Ex Parte Appeals. in both. Other parallel citations are discouraged.

Using Supplemental Examination Effectively to Strengthen the Value of Your Patents BNA Patent, Trademark & Copyright Journal September 30, 2011

cgm Doc 782 Filed 04/21/16 Entered 04/21/16 16:10:55 Main Document Pg 1 of 6

NEW PATENT PROSECUTION HIGHWAY PILOT PROGRAM BETWEEN UNITED STATES AND CHINA

ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE (COMMERCIAL LIST) ONTARIO SECURITIES COMMISSION. - and -

Structuring Waterfall Provisions in LLC and Partnership Agreements Navigating Complex Distribution Structures, Minimizing Negative Tax Consequences

72270 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 225 / Tuesday, November 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

35 USC 41. NB: This unofficial compilation of the U.S. Code is current as of Jan. 4, 2012 (see

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS AND INTERFERENCES. Ex parte GEORGE R. BORDEN IV

Paper 25 Tel: Entered: June 1, 2015 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD

ACA Deep Dive. Chart a Course of Compliance in a Sea of Change. Thursday, September 27 2:00 PM ET

Treatment of Business Method Patents in Pending Patent Reform Legislation: Bilski Backlash? BNA s Patent, Trademark & Copyright Journal July 15, 2011

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P Appellee No. 331 MDA 2012

What s Next for the Department s Borrower Defense Rule?

USPTO NEW CLAIMS AND CONTINUATIONS RULES FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS OCTOBER 2007

T.C. Memo UNITED STATES TAX COURT. MURRAY S. FRIEDLAND, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent

Reviewed no changes, no public comment, Valentine motioned, Wallace seconded. All in favor as presented, motion approved 3-0.

COURT OF APPEALS GUERNSEY COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

Transcription:

Patent Trial and Appeal Board State of the Board

USPTO Locations 2

Judge Members of the Board 250 Judges 225 231 200 150 170 178 100 50 0 81 68 47 5 5 9 13 13 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 1990 2000 2010 2012 2013 2014 2015 3

PTAB Office Location Demographics as of May 18, 2015 12% 7% 9% 6% 5% 57% Virginia Michigan Colorado Texas California TEAPP Hoteling 4% 4

Allocation of Judges as of May 18, 2015 7% 2% AIA 8% 32% Ex parte Appeals Inter Partes Reexamina9on Appeals Management 51% Interferences 5

AIA Statistics

AIA Trial Timeline 7

Petition Filing 8

Comparison by Technology Center of FY 2014 AIA Filings v. Patent Grants TC! AIA Filings! Patent Grants! 1600! 90! 24,669! 1700! 107! 31,863! 2100! 188! 24,422! 2400! 114! 30,983! 2600! 223! 40,445! 2800! 289! 70,281! 2900! 3! 22,452! 3600! 226! 38,160! 3700! 156! 42,931! Other! 98! 176! Total! 1,494! 326,382! 9

AIA Progress (as of May 21, 2015) AIA Monthly Filings Total 3,294 IPR 2,929 CBM 346 PGR 8 DER 11

AIA Progress (for FY15 through May 21, 2015) AIA Petition Technology Breakdown 4.5% 8.2% 0.2% Electrical/Computer - TCs 2100, 2400, 2600, 2800 (761) Mechanical/Business Methods - TCs 3600, 3700 (294) Chemical - TC 1700 (55) 24.3% Bio/Pharma - TC 1600 (99) 62.8% Design - TC 2900 (3)

Patent Owner Preliminary Response 12

AIA Progress (as of May 21, 2015) Cumulative Patent Owner Preliminary Responses Filed Waived IPR 1,892 416 CBM 250 28 PGR 3 1

Decision on Petition 14

AIA Progress (as of May 21, 2015) AIA Petition Dispositions Trials Instituted Joinders Percent Instituted Denials Total No. of Decisions on Institution FY13 167 10 + 87% 26 203 IPR FY14 557 15 + 75% 193 765 FY15 519 96 + 72% 239 854 FY13 14 0 82% 3 17 CBM FY14 91 1 + 75% 30 122 FY15 58-69% 26 84 DER FY14 0 0 0% 3 3

Final Written Decision 16

Inter Partes Review Petitions Terminated to Date (as of 4/30/2015) 29,774 Claims in 937 Petitions 13,699 Claims Challenged (937 Petitions) 16,075 Claims Not Challenged 8,886 Claims Instituted (65% of Claims Challenged) (656 Petitions) 4,813 Claims Challenged but Not Instituted (35% of Claims Challenged) 3,378 Claims Found Unpatentable (38% of Claims Instituted, 25% of Claims Challenged) (289 Petitions) 1,236 Claims Cancelled or Disclaimed (Non-PTAB) (14% of Claims Instituted, 9% of Claims Challenged) 876 Claims Found Patentable by PTAB (10% of Claims Instituted, 6% of Claims Challenged) 3,396 Claims Remaining Patentable (38% of Claims Instituted, 25% of Claims Challenged) 17

AIA Trial Rulemaking Update

AIA Trial Feedback Nationwide listening tour conducted in April and May 2014 Federal Register Request for Comments published in June 2014 http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/fr-2014-06-27/pdf/2014-15171.pdf Comment period closed October 16, 2014 Comments have been published on the Patent Trial and Appeal Board page of the USPTO website http://www.uspto.gov/ip/boards/bpai/public_comments_ptab_aia_trial_rfc.jsp A wide range of feedback was received Non-rule specific comments Comments directed to the seventeen questions posed for public input Quick-fixes for AIA Rules were implemented on March 27, 2015, and the final rule was published on May 19, 2015. Amendments to the Rules of Practice for Trials Before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, 80 Fed. Reg. 28,561 (May 19, 2015) (to be codified at 37 C.F.R. pt. 42) 19

Topics for Comment Claim construction Amendment practice Patent owner preliminary response Obviousness Real party in interest Discovery Oral hearing Extension of 1 year statutory period Multiple proceedings General catch-all 20

AIA Trial Rulemaking In response to stakeholder requests, the Office is moving forward with two rule packages: 1. A first package, which went into effect upon publication on May 19, 2015, encompasses less difficult quick-fixes based upon both stakeholder comments and internal PTAB suggestions. 2. A second package, issued as proposed rules, will address more difficult changes to the rules, and also will include any changes to the Trial Practice Guide. Plan to issue in July, 2015. 21

AIA Trial Rulemaking Quick-Fixes Amendments to the Rules of Practice for Trials Before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, 80 Fed. Reg. 28,561 (May 19, 2015) (to be codified at 37 C.F.R. pt. 42). Increased the number of pages for a motion to amend from 15 to 25 pages, with a commensurate increase in the number of pages for the opposition, in addition to allowing the Patent Owner to list the amended claims in an appendix. Increased the number of pages for a Petitioner s reply brief from 15 to 25 pages. 22

Boardside Chats

Boardside Chats 2015 Date Time Topic Speakers PTAB Statistics and Key Chief Judge James Tuesday, February 3 Decisions Donald Smith Tuesday, April 7 Tuesday, June 2 Tuesday, August 4 Tuesday, October 6 Noon to 1 pm Eastern Time Do s and Don ts for Ex Parte Appeals Discovery in AIA Trials AIA Rulemaking and Guidance Changes Best Practices before the PTAB Panel of Administrative Patent Judges Panel of Practitioners and Administrative Patent Judges Lead Judge Susan Mitchell Panel of Administrative Patent Judges Boardside Chat is a lunchtime webinar series to be held bi-monthly throughout 2015. The purpose of the Chats is to update you on current Board activities and statistics as well as to regularly receive your feedback about the same. All Chats are free and open to all. Also, all Chats will include time for attendee questions and comment. Materials from past events are on the PTAB website. 24

PTAB Website

Revised PTAB Website http://www.uspto.gov/about-us/organizational-offices/patent-trial-and-appeal-board 26

Subscription Center

Subscription Center http://enews.uspto.gov/lists/?p=subscribe&id=1 Sign up to receive the latest news and updates from the USPTO conveniently via e-mail 28

Thank You

Reference Materials

Major Differences between IPR, PGR, and CBM Inter Partes Review (IPR) Petitioner Estoppel Standard Basis Post Grant Review (PGR) Person who is not the patent owner and has not previously filed a civil action challenging the validity of a claim of the patent Must identify all real parties in interest Raised or reasonably could have raised Applied to subsequent USPTO/district court/itc action More likely than not OR Novel or unsettled legal question important to other patents/ applications 101, 102, 103, 112, double patenting but not best mode Inter Partes Review (IPR) Person who is not the patent owner, has not previously filed a civil action challenging the validity of a claim of the patent, and has not been served with a complaint alleging infringement of the patent more than 1 year prior (exception for joinder) Raised or reasonably could have raised Applied to subsequent USPTO/district court/itc action Reasonable likelihood 102 and 103 based on patents and printed publications Must identify all real parties in interest Covered Business Method (CBM) Must be sued or charged with infringement Financial product or service Excludes technological inventions Must identify all real parties in interest Office raised or reasonably could have raised Court-raised Same as PGR Same as PGR (some 102 differences) 31

Major Differences between IPR, PGR, and CBM Proceeding Available Applicable Timing Post Grant Review (PGR) Inter Partes Review (IPR) From patent grant to 9 months after patent grant or reissue For first-inventor-to-file, from the later of: (i) 9 months after patent grant or reissue; or (ii) the date of termination of any post grant review of the patent. For first-to-invent, available after grant or reissue (technical amendment) Patent issued under first-inventor-to-file Patent issued under first-to-invent or first-inventor-to-file Must be completed within 12 months from institution, with 6 months good cause exception possible Must be completed within 12 months from institution, with 6 months good cause exception possible Covered Business Method (CBM) Available 9/16/12 (for firstinventor-to-file only after PGR not available or completed) Patents issued under first-toinvent and first-inventor-to-file Must be completed within 12 months from institution, with 6 months good cause exception possible 32

Post Grant Resources Information concerning the Board and specific trial procedures may be found at: http://www.uspto.gov/ip/boards/bpai/index.jsp General information concerning implementation of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, including post grant reviews, may be found at: http://www.uspto.gov/aia_implementation/index.jsp 33

Questions?