Patent Law Practice Center

The Patentability Black Hole

Inventors in the unpredictable arts often have to face an unpredictable paradox when patenting an invention.  There seems to be a disconnect between requirements for an inventor to disclose an invention versus the prior art to render an invention unpatentable. Fenwick & West refer to this as the “patentability black hole”.  In this article, Fenwick & West discuss this dilemma and how to solve this patent law paradox.

An inventor faces a number of significant hurdles and pitfalls in patenting his invention. Having a patent specification providing proper and sufficiently thorough disclosure of the invention being claimed by the patentee can, by itself, be a large hurdle, especially in the biosciences where experimental data is essential. Section 112, first paragraph, of Title 35 of the United States Code sets forth the disclosure requirements that all patentees must meet. This section is commonly interpreted as requiring that a patent specification contain a full written description showing that the inventor was in possession of the claimed invention at the time the patent application was filed (the “written description” requirement) and that a patent specification enable a person of ordinary skill in the relevant field to make and use the invention based on the specification (the “enablement” requirement). See Ariad Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Eli Lilly and Company, 598 F.3d 1336, 1340 (2010). (more…)

Advanced Patent Prosecution Workshop: Claim Drafting & Amendment Writing

Yesterday, I attended PLI’s Advanced Patent Prosecution Workshop 2011 in New York where an esteemed panel of experts offered hands-on claim drafting and amendment writing techniques.  The program was organized into four technological sections: Biotechnology, Chemical/Pharmaceutical, Electrochemical and Electronics/Computers. I attended the Chemical/Pharmaceutical segment whereJohn Todaro of Merck & Co. discussed advanced issues in drafting of patent specifications.

Here are some highlights from his presentation….

-Draft the claims or Summary of the Invention first, because of the primary role of the patent specification in claim construction

-General Considerations in Drafting the Specification:

1. Distinguish invention from the prior art
2. Define claim terms
3. Provide broadest possible claim scope, while complying with section112 requirements
4. Consider ex-US patent law issues

–Control the length of the application – too long = excess fees. Cost issue is important, think about when drafting the application. (more…)

USPTO To Launch Prioritized Patent Examination Program May 4, 2011

The USPTO recently announced that the agency will launch it’s new prioritized examination system known as “Track One” on May 4, 2011.  Under the program, patent applicants can elect to accelerate examination of their patent applications (if the application meets certain requirements) filed on or after May 4, 2011.  The USPTO will then “prioritize” the handling of your patent application with a goal of reaching a final disposition within twelve months.  If “accorded special status”, the patent application will be placed on the examiner’s special docket throughout its entire course of prosecution before the examiner until a final disposition is reached.  Final Disposition for a twelve month goal means: (1) mailing of a notice of allowance; (2) mailing of a final Office action, (3) filing of a notice of appeal, (4) declaration of an interference by the BPAI, (5) filing of a request for continued examination, or (6) abandonment of the application within 12 months from the date prioritized status has been granted.

To qualify for Track One prioritized status, an applicant must meet certain requirements: (more…)

Invention to Patent: The Pitfalls, Perils and Process

The following was written by Gene Quinn, of IPWatchdog and Practice Center Contributor.

So you have an idea and want to get a patent? There are a number of things that you need to know about the invention and patent process that can help you focus your efforts and know what obstacles lay in front of you.

The first thing to know is that you cannot patent an idea. Many people will have great ideas, but will not be able to put that idea into a package appropriate for a patent because there is no invention, only a concept. To be sure, the idea is the all critical first step in the invention process. After you come up with the idea or concept you now need to put together a game plan on how to carry that idea through. The idea and game plan together form what the law calls conception. Conception is an important concept in patent law because in the United States it is the first person to invent that CAN ultimately receive the exclusive rights on an invention. (more…)

Taking Advantage of the First Action Interview Pilot Program

This post comes from Robert Hulse (Partner at Fenwick & West and Practice Center Contributor)

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) introduced its “First Action Interview Pilot Program” about two years ago. This program enables patent applicants to conduct an interview with the assigned patent examiner, by phone or in person, before the examiner issues a first office action. In the first office action, the patent examiner either allows the application or identifies grounds to reject the application based on the results of the examiner’s search of the prior art and review of the patent application.

Historically, patent applicants could conduct an interview with the patent examiner after the first office action was issued, but not before this time. With this program, the USPTO has attempted to bring the benefits of the interview earlier in the process by focusing the examiner on relevant aspects of the invention at the beginning of examination and helping the applicant understand the examiner’s interpretation of the patent claims that define the invention. (more…)