Upload
armstrong-teasdale
View
91
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Today, there's a more efficient way to challenge the validity of a patent without going to court. For the last 18 months, the Patent Office has been hearing contested patent reviews before the U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Join us as Jennifer Hoekel and Scott Eidson share recent trends and strategies for challenging patents through these post grant proceedings.
Citation preview
© 2014 Armstrong Teasdale LLP
1
© 2014 Armstrong Teasdale LLP
© 2014 Armstrong Teasdale LLP
Challenging the Validity of a Patent Before the PTAB
Jennifer Hoekel and Scott Eidson
July 30, 2014
© 2014 Armstrong Teasdale LLP
PTAB Procedures
What is the PTAB?• Patent Trial and Appeal Board• Appellate-like panel of three judges that
oversee each proceeding• Decisions appealable to the Federal Circuit
3 New Procedures For Challenging a Patent After it Issues• Post Grant Review (PGR)• Covered Business Method Review (CBM)• Inter Partes Review (IPR)
3
© 2014 Armstrong Teasdale LLP
Post Grant Review & Covered Business Method Review
CBM patent is a patent that claims a method, apparatus, or operation used in the practice, administration, or management of a financial product or service
Not including a technological invention
Only available to parties charged with infringement
Any invalidity ground Timeline: completed in 18
months Estoppel only to grounds
actually raised
Applicable to patents filed on or after March 16, 2013
Any invalidity ground Available for the first 9
months after a patent issues or reissues
Timeline: completed in 18 months
Estoppel applies (“raised or could have raised”)
4
Post Grant Review
Covered Business Method Review
© 2014 Armstrong Teasdale LLP
Inter Partes Review
Based on patents or printed publications and may be sought any time after post grant review period ends
Preponderance of the Evidence Standard Estoppel applies (“raised or could have
raised”) Requires threshold PTO determination to
institute review (similar to reexam) Time Limits: within 12 months of litigation; no
review if petitioner filed a DJ on invalidity Right to oral hearing, heard by PTAB5
© 2014 Armstrong Teasdale LLP
6
IPR Timeline
© 2014 Armstrong Teasdale LLP
Current Statistics and Trends
7
© 2014 Armstrong Teasdale LLP
Current Statistics and Trends
8
© 2014 Armstrong Teasdale LLP
Current Statistics and Trends
9
© 2014 Armstrong Teasdale LLP
Current Statistics and Trends
10
© 2014 Armstrong Teasdale LLP
Current Statistics and Trends
11
© 2014 Armstrong Teasdale LLP
Strategies: Challenging a Patent Identify claims to challenge
• Are they in litigation?
• Timing considerations Exhaust your prior art search (estoppel) Consider use of experts Set forth all of your arguments in the petition—60 page limit
• Cannot add new arguments as the proceeding goes forward
• Cannot incorporate from declaration
• Focus on a detailed analysis
• Multiple petitions—common practice (roughly 200 patents subject to multiple petitions attacking the claims)
− Attack claim groupings
− Attack on different invalidity arguments12
© 2014 Armstrong Teasdale LLP
Strategies: Challenging a Patent Joint Petition: Should we join with others to
file one petition?• PTAB will likely join multiple petitions attacking
the same patent Claim Charts
• Must be explained in petition with cites to supporting evidence
Experts • Must be supported by underlying facts or data
13
© 2014 Armstrong Teasdale LLP
Strategies: Defending Your Patent File a preliminary patent owner’s response?
• Attack redundant challenges and reduce the number of grounds
• Attack weaknesses in petition and prior art• No new evidence allowed
Do nothing?• Don’t preview your arguments• Save cost
Swear behind prior art?• Difficult to do in front of the PTAB
14
© 2014 Armstrong Teasdale LLP
Strategies: Defending Your Patent Amend claims during trial
• Not likely. Why?• One for one substitution• Must narrow • No examination • Burden on patent owner to show patentable
and distinct Settle
• If you wait too long, the PTAB may not stop the proceeding
15
© 2014 Armstrong Teasdale LLP
Related Considerations
Licensing: • Patent owner: pays for and controls prosecution• Licensee: Has the right (& obligation) to enforce
patent rights at its own expense −Who controls post grant proceedings? Who pays?
Conflicts?−Review and revise all license agreements to
clarify responsibilities and avoid conflicts Enforcement:
• Could/will become a common response to enforcement efforts
• Efforts will be delayed due to litigation stays• Budget accordingly/plan accordingly16
© 2014 Armstrong Teasdale LLP
Timeline & Costs: Litigation vs. Inter Partes Review
Cost to File:
• $400 Average Length of Time
(filing to trial):
• Just under three years*2011 AIPLA Survey
Average Cost (fees and expenses):
• $1-10 million in controversy: − $2.1 million through trial
• $10-25 million in controversy:
− $3.6 million through trial*2013 AIPLS Report of the Economic Survey
Cost to File: • $9,000 filing fee
+ $200/claim over 20• $14,000 institution fee
+ $400/claim over 15 Length of Time:
• 18 months. Average Cost (fees
and expenses):• $250,000-650,000.
17
Inter Partes Review
Patent Litigation
© 2014 Armstrong Teasdale LLP
Questions?
Scott EidsonPartnerIntellectual [email protected]
Jennifer HoekelPartnerIntellectual [email protected]
www.atpostgrant.com
CLE Confirmation Code: HE071218