Embed
Email

The Lab to Market Series: Building Sound Patent Practices

Document Sample
The Lab to Market Series: Building Sound Patent Practices
Shared by: HC11111700415
Categories
Tags
Stats
views:
0
posted:
11/16/2011
language:
English
pages:
45
The Lab to Market Series:

Building Sound Patent Practices



NYS Science & Technology

Law Center

May 16-17, 2005

George R. McGuire, Esq.

When is an invention

complete?

 Every invention contains two elements:

a mental element, and

 a physical one









2

Conception

 Mental element defined:

 Conception (formation) of definite idea in

mind of inventor of complete and operative

invention

 Complete performance of the mental part with

the only thing left to do is manifest in physical

form (reduce it to practice)

 Capable of being understood, constructed by,

and operated by those skilled in the art



3

Reduction to Practice

 Reduction to practice must be carried out

personally by the inventor or through

someone under the inventor's direction,

but it can be:

 Actual,or

 Constructive









4

When is an invention

complete?

 3 classes

 So simple and of obvious efficacy

 No need to build and test machine

 Mechanically imperfect machine

 Sufficient if all essential elements of invention are

present and practical utility demonstrated

 Complex machine

 The particular use for which it is intended must be

given special consideration, and requires

satisfactory operation in actual execution of the

object

5

Actual Reduction

 Building working invention

 Experimental machine that does not complete

utility is insufficient









6

Constructive Reduction

 Filingof patent application

 Describing the invention in detail which will

enable one skilled in the art to make and use

that which is disclosed

 Telephone cases (1888): A. G. Bell had not

been able to transmit telegraphically spoken

words, but description was so precise and

accurate that one skilled in the art could build

working telephone, thus demonstrating

reduction to practice

7

Critical dates for invention?

 Conception

 Reduction to Practice

 Diligence between those two dates









8

Diligence

 Reasonable effort directed toward embodiment of an

invention

 Fact specific – no bright line rule

 To prove, the first to conceive must show diligence during

the ―critical period from just before his opponent entered the

field up to the time he filed his own patent application.‖

 Not necessary to devote all time to invention or give up

livelihood

 Where inventor assigns control over invention to another

(e.g., for testing), conduct of assignee is controlling on

question of diligence (assignee behavior is transferred to

inventor)

 Inventor’s testimony on diligence must be corroborated!!!



9

Delay

 Excusable or Not?

 Legitimacy of delay governed by facts of each

case

 Possible Legitimate Delay Examples

 Testing an invention (awaiting results)

 Awaiting materials held up in shipment



 Compliance with Administrative Agency’s rules

(e.g., PTO rules)

 Funds – but generally in and of itself insufficient

unless extreme circumstance

10

Priority of invention?

 Priority goes to first to conceive and diligently

reduce invention to practice (U.S. rule)

 102(g): A person shall be entitled to a patent unless

before such person’s invention thereof, the invention

was made in this country by another inventor who

had not abandoned, suppressed, or concealed it. In

determining priority of invention under this

subsection, there shall be considered not only the

respective dates of conception and reduction to

practice of the invention, but also the reasonable

diligence of one who was first to conceive and last to

reduce to practice, from a time prior to conception by

the other.

11

Who is an inventor?

 The claims of the patent are the standard

for determining inventorship and who

conceived of the claimed invention is the

critical question

a sole inventor must have conceived the

ideas in all of the patent's claims;

 a co-inventor must have conceived the idea in

at least one of the patent's claims.





12

Who is an inventor?

 ―To constitute a man an inventor, it is not

necessary for him to have skill enough to

embody the invention in a working

machine, or in a model, or even in a

drawing‖ (suggestions by the inventor to

one of mechanical skill to make machine is

still inventorship).

 But it is not a sole invention to conceive a

result and then employ another to produce

that result.

13

What are rights of

co-inventors

 Each inventor owns an undivided interest

in the whole (absent an agreement to the

contrary) 35 U.S.C. §262

 No need to account to other co-owners

 No need to get approval from other co-

owners for exploitation

 Compare to Copyright Law

 Each co-owner can exploit without consent of

other co-owners, but must make an accounting

(prevents opportunistic exploitation of copyrighted

14 work)

Who are co-inventors

 Standards for determining joint inventors:

inventive contribution versus suggestion

A later participant’s contribution is not co-

invention unless it forms a definite conception

of at least some identifiable part of the

invention

 Same standard as conception for purposes of priority

 Must be so detailed that one skilled in the art be able

to incorporate the improvement into working example

of invention without exercising undue experimentation



15

Who are co-inventors

 If this idea had not been contributed,

would the claimed invention exist?

 Ifthe answer is no, then that person is

probably a co-inventor





 Be aware that inventorship can change as

application is prosecuted





16

Who are co-inventors

 divide co-workers into three groups:

 Those who contribute ideas that result in the

development of an invention as claimed. Members of

this group should be considered inventors;

 Those who contribute labor, supervision, or routine

techniques and other non-mental contributions.

Members of this group should not be considered

inventors; and

 Those who contribute ideas while an invention is

being developed, but whose ideas don't contribute

directly to the claimed invention. This group also

should not be considered as inventors

17

The Lab to Market Series:

Building Sound Patent Practices



NYS Science & Technology

Law Center

May 16-17, 2005

George R. McGuire, Esq.

PANEL DISCUSSION

Richard Newman

Vice President, New Produce Development, Medical Division,

Welch Allyn

 Developing laboratory notebook protocols



Lisa Dolak

Professor of Law, Syracuse University College of Law

 Use of electronic records in labs and in administrative/judicial proceedings



Varda Main

Director, Technology Licensing Office,

Rochester Institute of Technology

 Managing co-invention involving multiple institutions









19

LAB NOTEBOOKS

Inventorship

1. USA –

• Official inventor is the first to invent.

• Essential that you keep good records.

2. Foreign –

• Inventor is first to file the patent.

• Lab notebook entries are immaterial.

3. Convention Priority –

• You have 12 months from the US

filing date to file foreign equivalent patents.

• Priority date is same as original country.

Copyright Syracuse University 2005 NYSTARbuffalo.ppt



20

LAB NOTEBOOKS

What should be kept in a Lab Notebook?

•Concepts and ideas.

•Experimental data: materials (including

suppliers, catalog numbers, lot numbers,

concentrations, etc.)

•Instruments used (make, model, serial

number, settings, calibration data,

software versions.)









Copyright Syracuse University 2005 NYSTARbuffalo.ppt



21

LAB NOTEBOOKS

What should be kept in a Lab Notebook?

•Procedures/protocols + raw data = results

(favorable and unfavorable).

•Formulas and calculations.

•Content/date of outside collaborations, plus

identities of

collaborators.

•Results of brainstorming sessions, identify

novel contributors.





Copyright Syracuse University 2005 NYSTARbuffalo.ppt



22

LAB NOTEBOOKS

How should research records be kept?

•Traditional bound notebook with sequentially

numbered pages.

•Record in ink. May be in colors for clarity.

•State the need, teach solution, and explain

what you feel is novel.

•Date each entry.

•Use pages sequentially. Use line out and date

spaces.

•Cross out, don’t erase, mistakes or date

changes.



Copyright Syracuse University 2005 NYSTARbuffalo.ppt



23

LAB NOTEBOOKS

How should research records be kept?

Cross reference by notebook and page number

related works,

including other notebook entries, physical

samples,

computer printouts stored outside the

notebook.

•Securely affix inserts (data printouts,

photographs, napkins) with

signature and date across one side and

either the top or bottom.



Copyright Syracuse University 2005 NYSTARbuffalo.ppt



24

LAB NOTEBOOKS

How should research records be kept?

•Sign and date entries, changes, and

corrections at the end of

Each work day. All inventors must sign

each page.

•Have entries, changes, and corrections

witnessed and dated by

at least two non-inventors, but who

understand the work.







Copyright Syracuse University 2005 NYSTARbuffalo.ppt



25

LAB NOTEBOOKS

Security

•Inventor keeps notebook until full.

•Lock notebooks at night.

•When filled, file the notebooks in Legal

Department in safe location.

•If notebook becomes subject of suit, then Legal

keeps it.

•Be sure notebooks are not exposed to fire and

sprinkler systems.





Copyright Syracuse University 2005 NYSTARbuffalo.ppt



26

LAB NOTEBOOKS

Related Procedures

•In the US, a patent is barred if there is a

publication, public use, sale, or offer to sell more

than one year before filing.



•In foreign countries, a patent is barred if there is a

publication public use, sale, or offer for sale

occurring before the filing of either the US or

foreign application.





Copyright Syracuse University 2005 NYSTARbuffalo.ppt



27

LAB NOTEBOOKS

Related Procedures

•Do not offer for sale before filing patent

application (provisional?).

•Make out a marketing report to prove that it was a

market survey, not an offer for sale.

•Likewise, create a clinical results report to prove

that is was a clinical evaluation, not an offer for

sale.

•Do not disclose/receive information to/from

outsiders (suppliers, customers, joint ventures

without a signed NDA.



Copyright Syracuse University 2005 NYSTARbuffalo.ppt



28

LAB NOTEBOOKS

Overall Comments

•Do not discount your work, it might be

patentable.

•What might seem obvious to you, is not

necessarily ―obvious to one with

ordinary skill in the art‖.

•Write it in your lab notebook, and

•Let Legal decide later if it is patentable.







29

Lab Notebooks

 Developing lab notebook protocols.

 Good practices, include:

 Bound and numbered pages

 Dates when an idea was formed and work begun and

completed recorded

 Initial statements of objectives prior to experiments (always

written in ink)

 Full citations of standard protocols

 Test results attached to notebook, signed and dated across

added page and underlying notebook page.

 Conclusions and evaluation of results





30

Lab Notebooks

 Every page signed and dated by inventor and a witness (who is

not free to disclose publicly the contents of the notebook, and

who understands the invention should also sign and date the

notebook periodically (e.g., weekly))

 State reasons for not working on a project for any period of time

 Avoid gaps between entries and draw a line between sequential

entries









31

Lab Notebooks

 Each experiment should include the following sections:

a) Purpose. Begin with a short explanation of why you did the

experiment.

b) Protocol. Include a detailed description of what you actually

did. Provide sufficient detail so someone could repeat the

experiment exactly the way you did it. Indicate how each

solution was made. All procedures obtained from other

sources (e.g. lab manuals, lab protocols or research

articles) should be included as a permanent part of your

notebook the first time they are used. It is OK to cross-

reference previous experiments, but you should specify any

changes or differences in the experiments. Do not count on

your memory -- write all observations in your notebook

while you are doing the experiment.



32

Lab Notebooks

c) Results. Include the actual raw data in your notebook as

well as any plots or calculations. Show any equations used

for your calculations.

d) Discussion. Include a brief summary of the conclusions. Did

the control work? What do the results mean?

 Errors should be crossed out with a single line so

they remain readable. Do not erase or scratch

out errors or tear pages out of your notebook.

When an error is made, include a comment on

what went wrong and whether the experiment

was repeated. This will allow you to figure out

what actually happened even a long time after

33

you did the experiment.

Electronic Records

 Electronic records in labs and litigation/admin.

procedures

 Substantive legal issues relating to evidence of

inventions for the purposes of proving priority of

invention (first to invent) for U.S. patents. The law

respecting how to prove priority of invention is a well

defined body of law. Its application to electronic

record keeping merely requires an application of that

law to e-records. Thus, it is the legal principles that

are paramount, not the technology, per se, of record

keeping.



34

Electronic Records

 Corroboration

 Evidence of what was invented and when that invention came

into existence is generally NOT admissible in the United States

Patent and Trademark Office and U.S. courts for the purpose of

invalidating claims to the same invention made by another

UNLESS it is corroborated by someone other than the inventor.

Here, "inventor" means the person or persons who are named

on the patent/application. Corroboration therefore requires a

non-inventor to have reviewed and understood the inventors'

work. It is the date of that corroborator's review that defines

provable evidence of a date of invention. Thus, a co-worker,

technician, manager, or secretary, for instance, can corroborate.

It is, however, less likely that a non-technically trained person

will understand what they were asked to corroborate, and

therefore, it would be harder to prove a right to a date of

invention based upon a non technical person's knowledge.

35

Electronic Records

 Chain of Custody

 Evidence in legal proceedings in the U.S. is

only admissible if it meets the admissibility

requirements of the Federal Rules of

Evidence (FREs). The FREs provide that

documents and things relied upon as

evidence may be challenged for lack of a

"chain of custody", i.e., proof that they were in

the possession and control of a person or

entity that would not tamper with them.

36

Electronic Records

 Authentications

 Inall evidentiary proceedings, most

documents and things held out as evidence

do not "speak for themselves"; they must be

brought into evidence by testimony of a

person explaining what they are and where

they came from. Exceptions to this rule are

self authenticating records, such as patents,

publications, certain notarized documents,

and the like

37

Electronic Records

 Guidelines for e-records

 Generally speaking, a document

management system should incorporate

technology and security that facilitates

meeting the evidentiary requirements

noted above.

 Establish an official procedure for

electronic record keeping

 This procedure should be provided in written

form to each employee.

38

Electronic Records

 Generate permanent electronic records

 Back up and write protect electronic data

 Reference this data in a signed and dated

handwritten notebook

 Store electronic records in a safe repository

retained by custodians who could vouch for

their authenticity

 Electronic or digital signature software may

be employed to enhance the credibility of the

electronic records

39

Electronic Records

 Use hardware or software that prevents

the ability to edit original research

descriptions

 Create records that show the development of

the research

 Ensure security to prevent unauthorized

access to the system

 Password protect the system and data

 Limit system access to authorized personnel



40

Joint Research Management

 Managing co-inventors at multiple

institutions

• keeping records of who are considered

inventors and authors

• maintaining current addresses of inventors

and authors – e.g. when students graduate

• determination of royalty-sharing between

inventors/authors

• managing IP terms in sub-contracts and use

of consultants

• incorporation of third party IP

• export control issues

41

Joint Research Management

 CREATE ACT Safe Harbor (amendment to

35 U.S.C. 103(c)(2),(3)), in relevant part:



 (2) For purposes of this subsection, subject

matter developed by another person and a

claimed invention shall be deemed to have been

owned by the same person or subject to an

obligation of assignment to the same person if —









42

Joint Research Management

• (A) the claimed invention was made by or on

behalf of parties to a joint research

agreement that was in effect on or before

the date the claimed invention was made;

• (B) the claimed invention was made as a

result of activities undertaken within the

scope of the joint research agreement;

and

• (C) the application for patent for the claimed

invention discloses or is amended to

disclose the names of the parties to the

joint research agreement.

43

PANEL DISCUSSION

 (3) For purposes of paragraph (2), the term ―joint

research agreement‖ means a written contract,

grant, or cooperative agreement entered into by

two or more persons or entities for the

performance of experimental, developmental,

or research work in the field of the claimed

invention.

• using a project IP management plan

• coordination of invention disclosures

• coordination of patent application filing

• understanding IP ownership policies at each

institution (e.g. ownership of student IP,

44 adjunct faculty, visiting scientists)

PANEL DISCUSSION

Richard Newman

Vice President, New Produce Development, Medical Division,

Welch Allyn

Lisa Dolak

Professor of Law, Syracuse University College of Law

Varda Main

Director, Technology Licensing Office,

Rochester Institute of Technology









45


Related docs
Other docs by HC11111700415
Simple Dice Game to illustrate
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
Pattern Theory: the Mathematics of Perception
Views: 1  |  Downloads: 0
CSCI 230
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
Incoming SUPT Students
Views: 1  |  Downloads: 0
3350t1
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
bcdupdate2012
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
Database Systems Research on Data Mining
Views: 7  |  Downloads: 0
toolbox updates
Views: 1  |  Downloads: 0
Historia de Espa�a
Views: 2  |  Downloads: 0
PLAN DE DESARROLLO MUNICIPAL DEFINITIVO
Views: 9  |  Downloads: 0
By registering with docstoc.com you agree to our
privacy policy

You are almost ready to download!

You are almost ready to download!