Reference: United States Patent and Trademark Office at Wikipedia
LAST week the US government dealt with a serious issue we had been writing about for a number of months. CCIA, as it turns out, submitted a letter to the House Judiciary Subcommittee On IP [sic] and yesterday wrote this post:
Yesterday, we submitted a letter for the record to the House Judiciary Committee Subcommittee On Courts, Intellectual Property and the Internet. This letter, written in response to testimony submitted for the Subcommittee’s hearing on Sovereign Immunity and IP, provides the details of our analysis of the patents which Josh Malone and Phil Johnson identified as showing a disagreement on validity between the PTAB and federal courts. In contrast to their allegation of 200 patents, the real figure is far lower. Of the 3,056 patents reviewed by the PTAB which were also at issue in litigation in federal district courts, there are 43 cases (just over 1%) in which the PTAB and a district court have disagreed with one another.
[...]
Conclusion
The data, when correctly understood, shows that the PTAB only rarely disagrees with the federal courts when both review the validity of the same patent. The data also shows that the two venues only rarely review the validity of the same patent. We believe the Subcommittee’s work will benefit from this understanding of the extreme infrequency with which the PTAB and a district court reach different conclusions.
Members of a US congressional subcommittee on intellectual property held a hearing last week that appeared aimed at finding ways to stop companies from “renting” the sovereignty of Native American tribes in order to avoid a process that can lead to the invalidation of patents. Elected officials called a deal between Allergan pharmaceutical company and a northeastern tribe a “sham” and a “mockery”, and signalled the start of the legislative procedure to prevent such deals.
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) today issued changes to some patent fees, including increases in certain areas, including the cost of using the inter partes review process. Following feedback from users, the office went with some proposed increases, while keeping others at existing levels despite proposals to increase them, it said.
USPTO Finalizes Revised Patent Fee ScheduleWASHINGTON – The U.S. Department of Commerce’s United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) today issued a final rule, “Setting and Adjusting Patent Fees during Fiscal Year 2017” to set or adjust certain patent fees, as authorized by the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA). The revised fee schedule is projected to recover the aggregate estimated cost of the USPTO’s patent operations, Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) operations, and administrative services. The additional fee collections will support the USPTO’s progress toward its strategic goals like pendency and backlog reduction, patent quality enhancements, technology modernization, staffing optimization, and financial sustainability.
In response to feedback from patent stakeholders, the USPTO altered several of the fee proposals presented in the Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM). The key differences between the NPRM and the final rule are:
- In response to stakeholder concerns, the USPTO reduced both plant and design issue fees from the levels proposed in the NPRM. Still, the large entity plant issue fee increases to $800 (+$40) and the large entity design issue fee increases to $700 (+$140). Plant and design patents do not pay maintenance fees, and the majority of plant and design applicants are eligible for small and micro entity fee reductions, which remain available.
- Stakeholder feedback suggested that increased appeal fees could discourage patent holders’ access to increasingly important USPTO appeal services. In response, the USPTO elected to maintain the existing Notice of Appeal fee at $800 instead of increasing it to $1,000 as proposed in the NPRM. Likewise, the fee for Forwarding an Appeal to the Board increases to $2,240 (+$240) instead of $2,500 as proposed in the NPRM. The revised fees still do not fully recover costs, but taken together should allow continued progress on reducing the backlog of ex parte appeals. Since the 2013 patent fee rulemaking, ex parte appeal fees have enabled the PTAB to hire more judges and greatly reduce the appeals backlog, from nearly 27,000 in 2012 to just over 13,000 at the end of FY 2017. Additional appeals fee revenue will support further backlog and pendency reductions.
- Increases to the PTAB AIA trial fees are aimed at better aligning these fees with the USPTO’s costs and aiding the PTAB to continue to meet required AIA deadlines. The Office’s costs for Inter Partes Review requests are consistently outpacing the fees collected for this service. These fee adjustments seek to more closely align fees and costs. Trial fees and associated costs still remain significantly less than court proceedings for most stakeholders.
- Inter Partes Review Request Fee – up to 20 Claims increases to $15,500 (+$6,500)
- Inter Partes Review Post-Institution Fee – Up to 15 Claims increases to $15,000 (+$1,000)
Other fee changes proposed in the NPRM remain the same.
For the full list of the patent fees that are changing and more information on fee setting and adjusting at the USPTO, please visit http://www.uspto.gov/about-us/performance-and-planning/fee-setting-and-adjusting.
PTAB is important and the cost of petition matters, especially to small companies which are being targeted by trolls and have limited budget. PTAB defends them from patent trolls and software patents without having to go through courts and appeals, which can add up to hundreds of thousands if not over a million dollars in fees (no matter the outcome).
IAM says that according to Google's Suzanne Michel, "from [a] tech perspective IPRs have been very effective at reducing a lot of litigation" (direct quote from IAM but not Suzanne Michel). She is right.
United for Patent Reformââ¬Â also quotes a report/opinion piece (HTIA’s John Thorne) which we mentioned a week ago: “PTAB and IPR have provided a relatively inexpensive & rapid way for @uspto to take a second & impartial look at the work of examiners & strike down patents that should have never issued in the first place...”
Hence our stubborn defense of PTAB.
Yesterday, IAM noted or highlighted yet another case of PTAB being used to thwart dubious patents, even if the petitioner is a large company (PTAB bashers like to obsess over such points).
The world’s largest oil and gas company Saudi Aramco has filed an inter partes review (IPR) against a Korean petrochemical business in what is a highly unusual move by one of the energy majors.
The Saudi national oil giant, which produces 12.5 million barrels per day, has brought the IPR against SK Innovation, which started life as the Korea Oil Company before morphing into a broad-based energy and chemicals business. The patent in question, number 9,023,979, relates to a method of preparing epoxide/CO2 polycarbonates and was issued in 2015.
It’s not clear what has prompted the review - there is no ongoing patent litigation between the two companies, which might mean that it is related to licensing negotiations that have broken down and Saudi Aramco has brought the IPR in order to gain some leverage in the talks.
[...]
Halliburton is among the most active of these, with 36 IPRs including 32 this year, mostly against its rival Schlumberger. Baker Hughes meanwhile has been involved in 27 IPRs either as petitioner or patent owner.
This should not be mistaken for the Supreme Court case regarding Oil States, but it certainly seems similar in certain aspects. ⬆
Recent Techrights' Posts
- Bruce Perens & Debian public domain trademark promise
- Reprinted with permission from disguised.work
- Links 28/04/2024: Shareholders Worry "AI" Hype Brings No Income, Money Down the Drain
- Links for the day
- Lawyer won't lie for Molly de Blanc & Chris Lamb (mollamby)
- Reprinted with permission from disguised.work
- Over at Tux Machines...
- GNU/Linux news for the past day
- IRC Proceedings: Saturday, April 27, 2024
- IRC logs for Saturday, April 27, 2024
- Links 27/04/2024: Spying Under Fire, Intel in Trouble Again
- Links for the day
- Lucas Kanashiro & Debian/Canonical/Ubuntu female GSoC intern relationship
- Reprinted with permission from disguised.work
- Pranav Jain & Debian, DebConf, unfair rent boy rumors
- Reprinted with permission from disguised.work
- Links 27/04/2024: Kaiser Gave Patients' Data to Microsoft, "Microsoft Lost ‘Dream Job’ Status"
- Links for the day
- Gemini Links 27/04/2024: Sunrise Photos and Slow Productivity
- Links for the day
- Microsoft: Our "Goodwill" Gained Over 51 Billion Dollars in the Past Nine Months Alone, Now "Worth" as Much as All Our Physical Assets (Property and Equipment)
- The makeup of a Ponzi scheme where the balance sheet has immaterial nonsense
- Almost 2,700 New Posts Since Upgrading to Static Site 7 Months Ago, Still Getting More Productive Over Time
- We've come a long way since last autumn
- FSFE (Ja, Das Gulag Deutschland) Has Lost Its Tongue
- Articles/month
- Over at Tux Machines...
- GNU/Linux news for the past day
- IRC Proceedings: Friday, April 26, 2024
- IRC logs for Friday, April 26, 2024
- Overpaid lawyer & Debian miss WIPO deadline
- Reprinted with permission from disguised.work
- Brian Gupta & Debian: WIPO claim botched, suspended
- Reprinted with permission from disguised.work
- Microsoft's XBox is Dying (For Second Year in a Row Over 30% Drop in Hardware Sales)
- they boast about fake numbers or very deliberately misleading numbers that represent two companies, not one
- Ian Jackson & Debian reject mediation
- Reprinted with permission from disguised.work
- [Meme] Granting a Million Monopolies in Europe (to Non-European Companies) at Europe's Expense
- Financialization of the EPO
- Salary Adjustment Procedure at the EPO Challenged
- the EPO must properly compensate staff in order to attract and retain suitably skilled examiners
- How to get selected for Outreachy internships
- Reprinted with permission from disguised.work
- Links 26/04/2024: Surveillance Abundant, Restoring Net Neutrality Rules (US)
- Links for the day
- Gemini Links 26/04/2024: uConsole and EXWM and stdu 1.0.0
- Links for the day
- Red Hat Corporate Communications is "Red" Now
- Also notice they offer just two options: MICROSOFT or... MICROSOFT!
- Links 26/04/2024: XBox Sales Have Collapsed, Facebook's Shares Collapse Too
- Links for the day
- Albanian women, Brazilian women & Debian Outreachy racism under Chris Lamb
- Reprinted with permission from disguised.work
- Microsoft-Funded 'News' Site: XBox Hardware Revenue Declined by 31%
- Ignore the ludicrous media spin
- Mark Shuttleworth, Elio Qoshi & Debian/Ubuntu underage girls
- Reprinted with permission from disguised.work
- Karen Sandler, Outreachy & Debian Money in Albania
- Reprinted with permission from disguised.work
- Over at Tux Machines...
- GNU/Linux news for the past day
- IRC Proceedings: Thursday, April 25, 2024
- IRC logs for Thursday, April 25, 2024
- Links 26/04/2024: Facebook Collapses, Kangaroo Courts for Patents, BlizzCon Canceled Under Microsoft
- Links for the day
- Gemini Links 26/04/2024: Music, Philosophy, and Socialising
- Links for the day