We use cookies to give you the best online experience. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy. Learn more here.Close Me
In our last two updates, we reviewed the new definition of prior
art as well as the exceptions thereto. In view of the intricacies
imposed by the upcoming expansion of the definition of prior art,
patent applicants should consider the following:
Filing patent applications on or before March 15, 2013.
Applicants can beneficially use this interim time period (between
now and March 15, 2013) to file applications thereby obtaining the
benefits of the current first-to-invent system. This can be
particularly important for inventions that have a long development
cycle and may be entitled to a substantially earlier date of
invention.
Publishing invention disclosures on or after March 16, 2013.
Applicants can consider early publication of their inventions, even
prior to patent application filing, in view of the AIA assuming
that they do not contemplate seeking protection outside the U.S.
and intend to file a patent application within one year. These same
publications can render unpatentable later-filed patent
applications filed by others.
Preserving both U.S. and international patent rights by filing
at least a U.S. provisional patent application before disclosing
any invention.
Performing an early assessment of inventions, determining
whether the inventions are worthy of patent pursuit
internationally, or in the U.S. only, or should be held as a trade
secret, and then acting accordingly. If in the U.S. only, consider
early publication.
In conclusion, the view of the AIA's new definition of prior
art, patent applicants are well advised to "file early and
file often," such as to avoid finding themselves precluded
from patent opportunities by competitors who file or disclose
first.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.
To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.
Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.
As is well known, patent trolls often threaten dozens of alleged infringers in the hope of scoring quick license fees from those who understandably prefer to provide a modest payoff, thereby avoiding expensive and protracted litigation.
In order to best protect the IP rights of a U.S. company seeking to produce goods through a Chinese manufacturer by providing a protected design, the U.S. company needs to take actions even before the contracting stages.
On November 12, 2012, the State Intellectual Property Office of the People’s Republic of issued the Draft Rules on Inventor-Employee Inventions for public comment, and this article seeks to reconcile the different provisions between the Implementing Rules and the Draft Rules.
A discussion following Shepard Fairey pleading guilty to the misdemeanor charge of criminal contempt for destroying and altering documents in his civil lawsuit against The Associated Press.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed a summary judgment ruling in favor of seven film studios finding that the defendant induced third parties to download infringing copies of the plaintiffs’ copyrighted works.
Discussing The Supreme Court's Oral Arguments In Myriad Gene Patenting Case (Video Content)
