SFIPLA Dec. 14, 2010 at Ropers Majeski Kohn & Bentley Interviews for Compact Prosecution Dec. 14,...
-
Upload
jayden-mcneil -
Category
Documents
-
view
214 -
download
1
Transcript of SFIPLA Dec. 14, 2010 at Ropers Majeski Kohn & Bentley Interviews for Compact Prosecution Dec. 14,...
SFIPLADec. 14, 2010at Ropers Majeski Kohn & Bentley
Interviews for Compact Prosecution
Dec. 14, 2010 SFIPLACopyright Ernie Beffel
Slide 1
Dec. 14, 2010 SFIPLACopyright Ernie Beffel
Slide 3
Just Three Topics
• Why to interview: Policy, training and rules
• Getting ready: effective lesson plans
• Doing it: an argument-free structure and a new tool
Interview because …
Dec. 14, 2010 SFIPLACopyright Ernie Beffel
Slide 4
Top Down Policy
Director Kappos, before House Judiciary Committee, May 5, 2010: •Detailed training in efficient interview techniques, compact prosecution, and negotiations•Number of hours of interviews in FY 2010 exceeds FY 2009 by more than 60%•The average number of office action to disposition has dropped from 2.9 to a sustained level of approximately 2.3
Dec. 14, 2010 SFIPLACopyright Ernie Beffel
Slide 5
Years in the Making
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
MPEP Rev 4Not before FOAM
MPEP Rev 5Sometimes
MPEP Rev 6Encouraged
Jun 2006AE Announced
Apr 2008FAIP Announced
May 2009Training Interviews & CP
Nov 2009Time Credit Given
2010Roadshows
Training
First Action Interview Pilot
Accelerated Exam
Dec. 14, 2010 SFIPLACopyright Ernie Beffel
Slide 6
Direction and Training
2009 InterviewActing Commissioner Peggy Focarino:•“Training plans include interview training, training on compact prosecution …”•“Key practices: interviews held earlier in prosecution are a benefit to better focus on issues early in the examination process, interviews lead to early indication of allowable subject matter, interview usage later in prosecution may reduce unnecessary RCEs.”
Training: Interviews …
• Interviews are an opportunity to explain rejections, discuss prior art, clarify positions, and resolve issues.
• Interviews can be useful at any stage of the prosecution of an application.
• Interviews can lead to a better understanding of Applicant’s invention.
Dec. 14, 2010 SFIPLACopyright Ernie Beffel
Slide 8
Interviews (cont.)
• Interviews can bridge the knowledge gap between the Examiner and the Applicant and lead to better understanding each other’s position
• Interviews are an effective method for reaching agreement and advancing prosecution.
• Interviews promote compact prosecution
Dec. 14, 2010 SFIPLACopyright Ernie Beffel
Slide 9
and Compact Prosecution
• “Applicants and EXAMINERS should request interviews to advance prosecution– A telephone interview coupled with an
Examiner’s Amendment is a preferred practice for placing the application in condition for allowance.” (slide 5)
• Ex parte Quayle: “The examiner should always attempt to advance prosecution and resolve remaining issues through a telephone interview.” (slide 6)
Dec. 14, 2010 SFIPLACopyright Ernie Beffel
Slide 10
Compact Prosecution (cont.)
• “In Instances where the examiner is aware of a particular amendment that would clearly resolve an issue, SUGGEST IT! (Examiners without appropriate signatory authority should always verify the suggestion with whomever is signing the Office action).” (slide 12)
• “Avoid merely listing claim limitations and pointing to a large block of text in the reference..” (slide 13)
Dec. 14, 2010 SFIPLACopyright Ernie Beffel
Slide 11
Rules Authorizing an Early Interview
• Accelerated Examination
• Enhanced First Action Interview Pilot
• MPEP 713.02 – Interviews Prior to First Official Action
Dec. 14, 2010 SFIPLACopyright Ernie Beffel
Slide 12
Accelerated Exams
• Adopted in 2006• Mandatory interview
before FOAM• Patent issues in under
a year• Examination Support
Document
Dec. 14, 2010 SFIPLACopyright Ernie Beffel
Slide 13
Source: Wendy Garber, June 2, 2009 talk to Bio Partnership Mtg
Dec. 14, 2010 SFIPLACopyright Ernie Beffel
Slide 14
Commissioner Stoll’s Stats
• FOAM allowances jumped from 3.9% to 25% to 56%
• Enhanced program across all TC’s
• Informal adoption allowed
Dec. 14, 2010 SFIPLACopyright Ernie Beffel
Slide 15
MPEP 713.02Interview Before FOAM
• Rev. 6, Sept 2007, “encouraged”
• Rev. 5, Aug 2006, “will not be permitted unless”
• Rev. 4, August 2005, request “will not acknowledged … or granted”
Dec. 14, 2010 SFIPLACopyright Ernie Beffel
Slide 17
Summarizing the Rules
Approach Initiation Starting point
Examiner prep
Limitations
MPEP 713.02
Track in PAIR Informal,
applicant calls As arranged
Timing and willingness
First Action Interview Pilot
Opt-in One page from
Examiner Per program
Brevity of explanation
Accelerated Exam
File ESD Informal,
examiner calls For compact
prosecution ESD
Dec. 14, 2010 SFIPLACopyright Ernie Beffel
Slide 18
Getting Ready to …
• Teach and learn
• Question and listen
• Argue as a last resort
Dec. 14, 2010 SFIPLACopyright Ernie Beffel
Slide 19
Effective teaching overcomes:
• Writing, nerdiness, limited budgets and hindsight
• The “broadest reasonable interpretation” of awkward grammar
Dec. 14, 2010 SFIPLACopyright Ernie Beffel
Slide 20
• Background, objectives and advantage minimized
• Claims too abstract
• Special meanings from specification
• Novel element at end of the claim
Writing Gets in The Way
Dec. 14, 2010 SFIPLACopyright Ernie Beffel
Slide 21
Nerdiness Gets in The Way
• Geeks rule!!!
• Attorneys can be shy
• Easy to blame the other nerd
Dec. 14, 2010 SFIPLACopyright Ernie Beffel
Slide 22
Budgets Gets in The Way
• Balanced disposition budgets control examiner behavior
• Good preparation takes time
Dec. 14, 2010 SFIPLACopyright Ernie Beffel
Slide 23
Hindsight Gets in The Way
• Was the Examiner in high school when you applied?
• Were you in grade school when the Examiner started?
• Ungrounded broadest “reasonable” interpretation
Dec. 14, 2010 SFIPLACopyright Ernie Beffel
Slide 24
Psyching out the Lesson
• Know your audience
• Figure out the lesson to teach– Before search– With art, before FOAM– After FOAM
Dec. 14, 2010 SFIPLACopyright Ernie Beffel
Slide 25
What lesson to teach?
• Getting behind 102/103 issues
• 103 issues
• “Easy” 101/112 issues
Dec. 14, 2010 SFIPLACopyright Ernie Beffel
Slide 27
Sample Lesson Plans
102/103
• Not close• One element missing• Elements recombined• Claim misinterpreted• Cannot tell how examiner
is applying the ref• Reference as a whole• Selling a narrow
distinction
103 combinations
• How combined?• Combination defies
common sense-hindsight• Motivation leads to a
different combination• Destroying or changing
principle of operation for primary reference
• Objective indicia
Dec. 14, 2010 SFIPLACopyright Ernie Beffel
Slide 28
Getting Ready
• An agenda to make the examiner’s preparation productive
• Pictures
• Focus
• An amendment
• Arrange the interview
Dec. 14, 2010 SFIPLACopyright Ernie Beffel
Slide 29
Patent Public Advisory Committee Annual Report 2010
User Experience and IT Tools
“During the recent public session of the PPAC, it was noted that the USPTO has accepted desktop collaboration as a tool for enhancing telephonic interviews and for reducing the need for hoteling Examiners to travel to the Office for interviews. It was reported at a recent meeting that several collaboration tools are being evaluated and that they permit Examiners to follow a presentation visually, during a telephonic interview. It was reported that Examiners will appreciate this tool as an effective adjunct in the interview process, particularly when crafting amended claim language.”
Dec. 14, 2010 SFIPLACopyright Ernie Beffel
Slide 30
Doing It
Structure from Interview Training
• “Give the applicant an opportunity to explain the invention”
• “Openly discuss how inventive concepts are relayed or not relayed in the claims”
• “Discuss prior art and rejections.”
Dec. 14, 2010 SFIPLACopyright Ernie Beffel
Slide 32
Concrete Structure
• General background• Figures from app• Words of the claims• Figures from refs• Office action
(Amendments at the beginning, middle or end)
Dec. 14, 2010 SFIPLACopyright Ernie Beffel
Slide 33
The First Five Minutes
• Understanding your audience
• Getting the examiner to talk
• Three-way interview styles
Dec. 14, 2010 SFIPLACopyright Ernie Beffel
Slide 34
Adobe ConnectGreen Light!
SPE Dave Wiley, April 30, 2010:• “As far as allowing other
practitioners to use Adobe Connect, to my knowledge we have never discouraged or restricted any others from using the program, if other practitioners and patent examiners want to use the program then they can, we can not force either party to use them, but again they can if they wish.”
• Ccs: Stoll, Focarino, Hirshfeld
Dec. 14, 2010 SFIPLACopyright Ernie Beffel
Slide 36
Demonstration Time
Dec. 14, 2010 SFIPLACopyright Ernie Beffel
Slide 38
www.HMBay.com/talks
Dec. 14, 2010 SFIPLACopyright Ernie Beffel
Slide 39
Wrapping Up
• Agreements need to be really agreed – you’re talking to the judge
• Follow up promptly in writing
Dec. 14, 2010 SFIPLACopyright Ernie Beffel
Slide 40
About the Speaker
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
ATTORNEYS637 Main Street
P.O. Box 366Half Moon Bay, CA 94019
650.712.0340 Branch office in Santa Cruz
www.HMBay.com
Ernie Beffel– U Michigan, Industrial
Engineering and Operations Research ‘78 (summa cum laude)
– Stanford Law School ’81– Trial lawyer and partner,
Hancock Rothert & Bushoft– Co-founder and partner,
Haynes Beffel & Wolfeld
Dec. 14, 2010 SFIPLACopyright Ernie Beffel
Slide 41