Filewrapper®

Bring on the New Year - What is in Store for IP in 2014?

December 31, 2013
Post by Blog Staff

Happy New Year to all of our FilewrapperÒ followers! We hope 2013 was a productive year and wish you the best in 2014. As the New Year quickly approaches we would like to share with you a few predictions for 2014 for you to look forward to and for which to prepare!

· Increased opportunities for quasi-litigation under AIA. Various new mechanisms are available to challenge patents under the America Inventors Act (also referred to as “AIA” or “Patent Reform”) many provisions of which took effect in 2013. New strategies are available to challenge patents at the USPTO instead of challenging in court, providing distinct advantages—and some disadvantages. Inter Partes Review, Post-Grant Review and transitional programs specific for business method patents are quasi-litigation proceedings which are heard by a panel of USTPO administrative law judges. Ex Parte Reexamination—which has been available since 1981—also remains to allow a patent challenge to be heard by a patent examiner, requiring little from the challenger other than filing required papers with some evidence of patent invalidity. The cost for ex-parte reexamination has significantly increased, although it remains a far less expensive option than litigation with the courts.

· (Finally) an international design patent application is available! Design patents protect a product’s new, original and ornamental design. Design patents present a smart option for investment in protecting a product, since they cost significantly less than utility patents and are generally granted at a much faster rate. In addition to these benefits of filing design patents, changes in international design registration under the Hague Agreement may facilitate more effective international protection for your design inventions. Effective December 18, 2013 a single international application designating a variety of countries for protection can be filed through the International Bureau of WIPO. This is beneficially a single international application to be filed at one location, which will ultimately be examined by many different Offices thereafter to provide more prompt and cost effective options for design protection. Over 60 countries and territories—including the European Union—are members of the Hague Agreement. However, there are various countries that are excluded from this treaty (e.g. Australia, Canada, China, Mexico, Japan, India, and Brazil), which would require a separate application as has been done in the past for foreign design patents. Nonetheless, the Hague Agreement provides significant improvements for international design protection.

· (Some USPTO) Fees Decrease January 1, 2014. In addition to the new classification of “micro-entity” status for Applicants to receive 75% reduction of some USPTO fees that took effect in 2013, the New Year also brings certain fee reductions. Notably, Issue Fee payments for granted patents are substantially reduced (from $1,780 to $960 for large entity), along with the removal of publication fees and assignment recordation fees. Reissue patent, design patent and plant patent issue fees are also decreasing. In addition, in 2014 certain PCT fees will be eligible for payment under small and micro entity status.

· The search continues for a test to determine patentable subject matter under §101. The Supreme Court will hear CLS Bank v. Alice in 2014 after the Federal Circuit’s en banc decision in 2013 found many software patents to be ineligible. The Supreme Court will again try to define an abstract idea in considering whether claims to a computerized method (using a computer-readable medium and a computer to implement instructions) is patentable subject matter. Both the Federal Circuit and patentees are still searching for a test under §101 that is “consistent, cohesive, and accessible [to provide] guidance and predictability for patent applicants and examiners, litigants, and the courts.”

· We may receive further guidance on Claim Indefiniteness. The Supreme Court is expected to grant certiorari on Nautilus v. Biosig Instruments involving indefiniteness under §112, second paragraph to determine whether claims having multiple reasonable interpretations are too ambiguous and would render a patent unenforceable for lack of written description.

· Protecting American from “Patent Trolls.” As previously reported on FilewrapperÒ, there is legislative movement in the House and Senate to limit lawsuits which can be filed by non-practicing entities (NPEs or Patent Trolls). There seems to be great energy around limiting “frivolous” lawsuits in our court system. In early 2014, the Senate will consider a companion bill to Senate 1720 ("Patent Transparency and Improvements Act of 2013"), which is said to already have support from the White House. If legislation passes the Senate, then the House and Senate bills will need to be reconciled before being sent to the President.

· New Patent Director. Stay tuned for further administrative changes at the USPTO as the new Director, Michelle Lee, takes office January 13, 2014. The former Google executive has been made deputy director of the USPTO, and in that capacity will take on the duties of acting director. Lee has issued statements planning to “attack” the backlog of unexamined patents (remains at more than 500,000) and improve patent quality with improved inter partes review.


Post Categories

Comments (0)
Post a Comment



Captcha Image
Return to the Filewrapper Blog

Search Posts

Purpose

The attorneys of McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C. designed this blog as an informational and educational resource about intellectual property law for our clients, other attorneys, and the public as a whole. Our goal is to provide cutting-edge information about recent developments in intellectual property law, including relevant case law updates, proposed legislation, and intellectual property law in the news.

Disclaimer

McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C. provides this blog for general informational purposes only. By using this blog, you agree that the information on this blog does not constitute legal or other professional advice and no attorney-client or other relationship is created between you and McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C. Do not consider this blog to be a substitute for obtaining legal advice from a qualified, licensed attorney. While we try to revise this blog on a regular basis, it may not reflect the most current legal developments. We consciously refrain from expressing opinions on this blog and instead, offer it as a form of information and education, however if there appears an expression of opinion, realize that those views are indicative of the individual and not of the firm as a whole.

Connect with MVS

Enter your name and email address to recieve the latest news and updates from us and our attorneys.

Subscribe to: MVS Newsletter

Subscribe to: Filewrapper® Blog Updates

  I have read and agree to the terms and conditions of McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C.

Captcha Image