Tech Transfer and Patents: Observations at AUTM

My name is Cathi Kennedy and I am the program coordinator for the MSc in Patent Law. This week I’m attending the Association of University Technology Managers’ (AUTM) Central Regional Meeting in Indianapolis. Representatives from universities, law firms, and industry are here to exchange ideas, network, and learn about new trends and practices in the field.

Having neither a technical nor legal background, I am here to observe and absorb information and meet nice, very smart people who are interested in hearing about the MSc in Patent Law program.

Today’s first session was about the America Invents Act, which went into effect on March 16th. Two people on the panel were from the USPTO. They spoke to the new procedures and requirements surrounding the new act, and also about the AIA training and resources available for both new and seasoned patent examiners.

The other presenters were from law firms and a tech transfer office. They spoke about how the new act is changing the way patent applications are being written and prosecuted and took questions from the audience.

I also attended an interactive session on “Negotiating the Basics.” In this session, we broke out into groups in which half the took the side of the university and the other half played the role of the industry. Each side then had to go through the terms of negotiation on the technology for the Horseless Carriage from their perspective. The terms that were considered were scope, term, joint development, reps and warranties, consideration (payments), improvements, and enforcement of patent rights.

My half of the group represented the company side of the negotiation (although all the members of the group work for tech transfer departments). Panel representatives from a university tech transfer office and from a large biotech company then talked through each of the terms of negotiation from their viewpoint. It was interesting to see how each side ranked the terms’ importance and which areas were more contentious (consideration and reps and warranties for instance).

Tomorrow’s agenda: licensing opportunities from non-traditional sources, and trends and strategies for working with academia from the industry leader perspective.

Leahy-Smith America Invents Act

A post from our student blogger Sarah Goodman

During the Fall semester our MSPL class has attended several presentations on the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act. This Act was signed into law by President Obama on September 16, 2011. The America Invents Act changes some aspects about patent law in the United States and also includes new material. Most of the changes have already been implemented, and the final modifications will be implemented on March 16, 2013. Presented in this blog post are a couple of the major changes.

One of the best-known adjustments to patent law is the shift from the current First-to-Invent system to a First-Inventor-to-File system. This change will come into effect on March 16, 2013. This adjustment is based on the change to 35 U.S.C. §102 which states that a U.S. patent will not be granted if “the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.” The filing date of the earliest patent application to which a U.S. patent application claims the benefit of priority is considered the effective filing date. This provision eliminates the legal concept of an “invention date.” It is important to remember that an individual cannot claim inventor status unless that individual actually invented the material claimed in the patent application.

Another important change was implemented on September 16, 2011 concerning the best mode requirement. The best mode is defined as the preferred mode for practicing the invention. The disclosure of the best mode ensures that the inventor fully enables the public to have access to the best method of using the invention. Previously, lack of disclosure of the best mode was a basis to invalidate or cancel an issued U.S. patent. The America Invents Act has modified 35 U.S.C. §282 by removing the lack of a best mode as a rationale for potential U.S. patent invalidity. However, 35 U.S.C. §112, which addresses the requirement for inclusion of the best mode has not been amended. Therefore, patent applicants must still comply with the requirement to disclose the best mode contemplated by the inventor for carrying out the invention.

The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act will affect U.S. patent applications that are filed on or after the dates of specific law implementation. Therefore U.S. patent practitioners will need to have a working knowledge of the laws before and after the new changes of the America Invents Act.