Sweeping patent law reform may change patent attorneys roles and patent applications
Why the new law may make enforcement of some claims difficult
Sweeping patent law reform may change patent attorneys roles and patent applications
Since the passing of the Leahy-Smith America Investments Act of 2011, patent attorneys may see changes in the number of inventors who file lawsuits or the number of inventors who come to their office to file patent applications. Under old patent laws, an inventor had protection by a first to invent ruling. However, the new law states the person or company that files their non-provisional patent first is awarded a patent. There is a grace period; however, an inventor may still claim a patent under the new regulations. What does this mean for patent attorneys and how will it affect the number of inventors who come in seeking to file patent applications?
Under the old ruling, one attorney admitted he used to tell clients to take their time filing for a provisional patent because they could amend their application and file a non-provisional patent application later. Since the law now states the first to file has right to a patent, he has amended his advice and recently advised clients to file non-provisional patents and patent applications quickly.
Why the new law may make enforcement of some claims difficult
Patent attorneys who handle litigation over non-provisional patent lawsuits, may find determining burden of proof may rest more squarely on their shoulder. What changes does this new patent ruling bring? Attorneys may have more difficulty proving challenges for their clients when it comes to asking the Patent Trade Office to re-examine an inventor’s application for a non-provisional patent. The new legislation makes it increasingly difficult to get PTO examiners to re-examine any patent applications, though it is said to speed the time in which applicant’s inventions receive patents.
The law has relaxed regulations on the Best Mode requirement and further limited the attorney and inventor’s ability to sue multiple offenders in a single lawsuit. What does this mean for those filing patent applications? Attorneys may see people paying more to obtain their services because they have to file different defendants in different courts. This may make it for difficult for an attorney to prove that when their client filed their patent applications for a non-provisional patent, they did not make inconsistent construction claims on their patent applications.
About the Author
The Invention Protection Law and Research Group (IPLRG) is a law firm specializing in protecting the intellectual property interests of individual inventors and small businesses through entrepreneurial efforts. Our firm was founded by, and only employs, experienced patent attorneys and patent agents. We deliver quick turn-around on services and our experience is unmatched, with thousands of successful patent filings to date. For more information about the services we can offer you, visit us at: www.inventionprotectionlaw.com
Tell others about
this page:
Comments? Questions? Email Here