1 / 55

PATENTS

PATENTS. PROF. JANICKE IP SURVEY COURSE 2011. THE USUAL QUESTIONS:. CAN I GET A PATENT ON ____? IF I’M EMPLOYED OR CONSULTING, WHO WILL OWN IT? HOW MUCH WILL IT COST?. THE USUAL QUESTIONS:. HOW LONG WILL IT TAKE? WHAT CAN I DO WITH IT IF I GET IT?. ELIGIBILITY.

zariel
Download Presentation

PATENTS

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. PATENTS PROF. JANICKE IP SURVEY COURSE 2011

  2. THE USUAL QUESTIONS: • CAN I GET A PATENT ON ____? • IF I’M EMPLOYED OR CONSULTING, WHO WILL OWN IT? • HOW MUCH WILL IT COST? IP Survey -- Patents

  3. THE USUAL QUESTIONS: • HOW LONG WILL IT TAKE? • WHAT CAN I DO WITH IT IF I GET IT? IP Survey -- Patents

  4. ELIGIBILITY • JUST ABOUT ANYTHING BELIEVED TO BE “NEW” – BASICALLY NOT KNOWN BEFORE • COMPUTER SOFTWARE: GENERALLY YES • BUSINESS METHODS: YES IP Survey -- Patents

  5. ACTUAL INVENTORS MUST “APPLY” • MERELY PAPERWORK – OWNERSHIP IS OFTEN IN AN ASSIGNEE • WHO ARE THE INVENTORS? • ROLE OF CLAIMS IN MODERN PATENT LAW • YOU DON’T PATENT A SINGLE THING ANY MORE IP Survey -- Patents

  6. INVENTORS • THOSE WHO THOUGHT OF SOMETHING COVERED BY THE CLAIM • NOT THOSE WHO LEARNED IT FROM SOMEONE ELSE IP Survey -- Patents

  7. INVENTORS • YOU DON’T REALLY KNOW WHO THEY ARE UNTIL THE CLAIMS ARE DRAFTED • THOSE INVOLVED IN A MINISTERIAL OR MANAGERIAL WAY AREN’T IP Survey -- Patents

  8. INVENTORS • ARE ALWAYS THE INITIAL OWNERS OF THE PATENT RIGHT • USUALLY THEY ASSIGN TO A COMMON ENTITY, WHICH BANKROLLS THE APPLICATION IP Survey -- Patents

  9. HOW THE CLAIMS SYSTEM WORKS • CLAIMS ARE AT THE BACK OF A PATENT • THEY ARE THE ONLY IMPORTANT PART, FOR PRACTICAL PURPOSES • THEY DEFINE THE SCOPE OF COVERAGE – A FAMILY OF THINGS IP Survey -- Patents

  10. PURPOSE OF A CLAIM: TO DEFINE COVERAGE AS BROADLY AS POSSIBLE • ANYONE WHO LATER OPERATES WITHIN THE FAMILY OF A CLAIM IS AN “INFRINGER” • OTHERS AREN’T IP Survey -- Patents

  11. EXAMPLE OF CLAIMING: THE FIRST CAR • CLIENT SHOWS YOU A MACHINE SHE HAS DEVISED • IT HAS: • CHASSIS • 4 WHEELS • 10-CYLINDER ENGINE • BRAKE ON EACH WHEEL • 3-SPEED TRANSMISSION IP Survey -- Patents

  12. HOW TO CLAIM? • RULE #1: CLAIM CAN BE AS BROAD AS POSSIBLE, BUT MUST NOT COVER ANY PREVIOUSLY KNOWN CONFIGURATION • RULE #2: CLAIM MUST EMBRACE SOMETHING THE INVENTOR DEVISED IP Survey -- Patents

  13. RETURN TO CAR EXAMPLE • ASSUME: CLOSEST PREVIOUSLY KNOWN MACHINE WAS THE HORSE-DRAWN WAGON IP Survey -- Patents

  14. CLAIM 1: 1. A VEHICLE, COMPRISING: (a) A CHASSIS; (b) A PLURALITY OF WHEELS ATTACHED TO SAID CHASSIS; AND (c) AN ENGINE FOR TURNING ONE OF SAID WHEELS. IP Survey -- Patents

  15. CLIENT’S PRIDE • CLIENT IS UPSET: NO MENTION OF HER 10-CYLINDER ENGINE, THE FINEST PART OF THE CREATION! • CAR WON’T BE ANY GOOD WITHOUT IT! • SAME FOR 3-SPEED TRANSMISSION IP Survey -- Patents

  16. ADVICE: • DON’T GIVE UP BROADEST SCOPE! • WRITE MANY OTHER CLAIMS, NARROWER (IN CASE CL. 1 TURNS OUT TO VIOLATE RULE #1) • EACH CLAIM IS TREATED AS A MINI-PATENT IP Survey -- Patents

  17. ONE EXCEPTION: NEW INFO ON PRIOR ART • YOU FIND OUT AT SOME POINT THAT THE LOCOMOTIVE PRE-EXISTED YOUR CLIENT’S DEVELOPMENT IP Survey -- Patents

  18. AMENDED CLAIM 1: 1. A VEHICLE, COMPRISING: (a) A CHASSIS; (b) A PLURALITY OF WHEELS ATTACHED TO SAID CHASSIS; (c) AN ENGINE FOR TURNING ONE OF SAID WHEELS; AND (d) A STEERING DEVICE FOR TURNING AT LEAST ONE OF SAID WHEELS. IP Survey -- Patents

  19. A BROADLY CLAIMED FAMILY IS ESSENTIAL • MOST PATENTS ARE DEAD LETTERS, BECAUSE THE CLAIM SCOPE IS NOT COMMERCIALLY MEANINGFUL • EASY TO DESIGN AROUND SUCH CLAIMS IP Survey -- Patents

  20. ONLY CLAIMS ARE HELD VALID OR INVALID – NOT “PATENTS” • EACH CLAIM IS ADJUDICATED INDEPENDENTLY • A “PATENT” IS NEITHER VALID NOR INVALID IP Survey -- Patents

  21. ONLY A CLAIM CAN BE INFRINGED • ACCUSED INFRINGING PRODUCT/METHOD MUST BE WITHIN LANGUAGE DEFINING THE FAMILY OF A VALID CLAIM • “CLAIM SCOPE IS EVERYTHING!” IP Survey -- Patents

  22. MOST PATENTS CONTAIN MANY CLAIMS, OF VARYING SCOPE • USUAL STYLE: NARROWER CLAIMS TELESCOPE DOWNWARD • ARE NEEDED ONLY IN THE EVENT THE BROADER CLAIMS ARE HELD INVALID IP Survey -- Patents

  23. HOW EFFECTIVE IS A PATENT? • DEPENDS ON THE CLAIM SCOPE • DEPENDS ON $$ TO FIGHT • 45% ARE HELD INVALID IP Survey -- Patents

  24. DO YOU HAVE TO DO A SEARCH BEFORE FILING? • NO. BUT NOT SEARCHING ENLARGES RISK OF WRITING UNPATENTABLE CLAIMS. • PTO NOW MOVING TO REQUIRE SEARCHES IP Survey -- Patents

  25. DO YOU HAVE TO BUILD AND TEST THE INVENTION BEFORE FILING? • NO. FILING APPLICATION ACTS AS “CONSTRUCTIVE” REDUCTION TO PRACTICE. • NOT GOOD TO WAIT. IP Survey -- Patents

  26. WHAT ARE THE CHANCES OF GETTING A PATENT ALLOWED? • IF YOU DON’T CARE ABOUT CLAIM SCOPE, MAYBE 90% • BUT MOST WILL BE COMMERCIALLY INSIGNIFICANT DUE TO NARROW SCOPE – EASY TO DESIGN AROUND IP Survey -- Patents

  27. LACK OF NOVELTY FOR A CLAIM AND LOSS OF RIGHTTO A CLAIM • FOCUS ON §102 (b) – IT ACCOUNTS FOR 90% OF SITUATIONS ENCOUNTERED IN REAL LIFE IP Survey -- Patents

  28. 4 “PRIOR-ART” EVENTS: • PATENTING • DESCRIBING IN PRINTED PUBLICATION • OFFERING FOR SALE (IN U.S.) • PUBLICLY USING (IN U.S.) IP Survey -- Patents

  29. RULE • IF ANY ONE MEMBER OF THE CLAIMED FAMILY APPEARS IN THE PRIOR ART, THE CLAIM IS INVALID • TRUE NO MATTER HOW REMARKABLE THE OTHER SPECIES ARE • DISCOVERY OF GREAT PROPERTIES, AND THEIR DISCLOSURE IN THE PATENT, WILL NOT SAVE THE CLAIM IP Survey -- Patents

  30. NO WAY OUT(OTHER THAN EARLY U.S. FILING DATE) • EARLY INVENTION DATE WON’T HELP • FOREIGN PRIORITY DATE WON’T HELP IP Survey -- Patents

  31. A CLOSER LOOK AT “DESCRIBED IN A PRINTED PUBLICATION” • ACTUAL PRINTING NOT REQUIRED; REASONABLE ACCESSIBILITY IS SUFFICIENT • BUT DOESN’T HAVE TO BE WELL KNOWN • CAN BE IN A UNIVERSITY LIBRARY • ENABLING DISCLOSURE IS REQ’D. IP Survey -- Patents

  32. A CLOSER LOOK AT THE ON-SALE BAR • COMPLETED SALE NOT REQUIRED • OFFER IN U.S. IS ENOUGH • INVENTION MUST BE “READY FOR PATENTING” Pfaff v. Wells Electronics, 525 U.S. 55 (1998) IP Survey -- Patents

  33. A CLOSER LOOK AT THE PUBLIC-USE BAR • PRIMARY PURPOSE OF EXPERIMENTATION, EVEN IN PUBLIC, TAKES ACTIVITY OUTSIDE THE PUBLIC USE CATEGORY • PRIVATE USES CAN BE A BAR BY ANALOGY TO ON SALE, IF REGULARLY USED FOR PROFIT • LEARNED HAND’S RULE RE. METHOD CLAIM SECRETLY USED IN PROFITABLE SERVICING: REBUILDING ENGINE PARTS IP Survey -- Patents

  34. SOME PRACTICAL PROBLEMS UNDER § 102(b) • [SEE FILE IN CLASS MATERIALS: “TIMEBAR PROBLEMS ON PATENT CLAIMS”] IP Survey -- Patents

  35. OBVIOUSNESS • THE CENTRAL GROUND OF REJECTION IN MOST APPLICATIONS • KEYED TO THE PERSON “OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART” AT THE TIME INVENTION WAS MADE §103(a) IP Survey -- Patents

  36. THE DISCLOSURE PORTION OF THE APPLICATION • REFERS TO DRAWINGS, SPECIFICATION (OTHER THAN CLAIMS) • NORMALLY DOESN’T HAVE MAJOR IMPACT ON SCOPE IP Survey -- Patents

  37. THE DISCLOSURE PORTION OF THE APPLICATION • IS A BURDEN IMPOSED BY STATUTE • MUST TEACH HOW TO MAKE AND USE WHAT’S CLAIMED § 112 (1st para.) • MUST SET FORTH THE “BEST MODE” – SUBJECTIVELY § 112 (1st para.) IP Survey -- Patents

  38. THE WRITTEN DESCRIPTION IS SPECIFIC, AND TELLS WHAT THE INVENTOR ACTUALLY DEVISED OR IMAGINED • IS A SMALL PART OF THE CLAIM SCOPE • A CLAIM MUST INCLUDE WHAT INVENTOR IMAGINED, i.e., ONE OR TWO MEMBERS OF THE FAMILY, BUT SHOULD COVER A BIGGER FAMILY • THE INTENT IS TO COVER FUTURE INVENTIONS OF OTHERS! IP Survey -- Patents

  39. INFRINGEMENT IS OFA CLAIM • JUDGMENT IN A PATENT CASE IS BY CLAIMS, NOT “THE PATENT” • ONE CLAIM STANDING VALID AND INFRINGED = A VICTORY FOR THE PATENT OWNER IP Survey -- Patents

  40. ACTS OF INFRINGEMENT SOMETHING WITHIN THE CLAIM IN THE U.S. DURING THE TERM • MAKING • USING • SELLING • OFFERING TO SELL • IMPORTING §271 (a) IP Survey -- Patents

  41. INDIRECT INFRINGEMENT • INDUCING §271 (b) • CONTRIBUTORY §271 (c) • SHIPPING PARTS §271 (g) • IMPORTING PRODUCT OF PATENTED PROCESS §271 (g) IP Survey -- Patents

  42. TYPICAL MODERN BUSINESS TRANSACTION • THREE OR MORE PLAYERS: • PARTS/MATERIALS VENDOR • MANUFACTURER/SELLER • RETAILER • COULD BE MANY MORE: • CONSULTANT/ADVISOR • END USER IP Survey -- Patents

  43. EACH PLAYER NEEDS TO BE ANALYZED FOR LIABILITY • CLAIM-BY-CLAIM ANALYSIS • DON’T COUNT ON INDEMNITY • BUT ….. IP Survey -- Patents

  44. EXAMPLE: A POWER DRILL FOR HOME USE • PATENT HAS TWO CLAIMS: • STRUCTURE OF A DRILL 2. METHOD OF DRILLING THROUGH CONCRETE, USING THAT DRILL IP Survey -- Patents

  45. CONSIDER POSSIBLE INFRINGERS: • VENDOR OF MOTORS TO TOOLCO • TOOLCO • RETAILER • END USER WHO IS LIABLE FOR WHAT? IP Survey -- Patents

  46. OWNERSHIP • ORIGINATES FROM NAMED INVENTORS • WHY JOINT OWNERSHIP IS IMPRACTICAL (ABSENT STRINGENT AGREEMENT): • ANY CO-OWNER CAN USE FREELY • ANY CO-OWNER CAN LICENSE WITHOUT ACCOUNTING TO OTHER CO-OWNERS IP Survey -- Patents

  47. MORE ABOUT FOLLIES OF JOINT OWNERSHIP • HARD TO AGREE ON BRINGING SUIT • HARD TO AGREE ON PAYING FOR SUIT • HARD TO AGREE ON SETTLEMENT POSTURE IP Survey -- Patents

  48. LICENSING • PERMISSION TO DO WHAT WOULD OTHERWISE BE ILLEGAL • 3 GENERAL TYPES: • NONEXCLUSIVE • SOLE [does not exclude patent owner] • EXCLUSIVE [excludes patent owner] IP Survey -- Patents

  49. IMPLIED WARRANTIES • LICENSOR HAS SUFFICIENT TO GRANT THE LICENSE • LICENSE TO MAKE INCLUDES “HAVE MADE” IP Survey -- Patents

  50. NOT IMPLIEDLY WARRANTED • VALIDITY OF ANY CLAIM • PRACTICING LICENSE WILL NOT INFRINGE THIRD-PARTY PATENTS • LICENSOR WILL “THROW IN” RELATED PATENTS • OTHERS WON’T GET BETTER TERMS IP Survey -- Patents

More Related