May 24, 2012

President Obama Signs Patent Reform Into Law

September 16, 2011, President Obama signed into law the most comprehensive reform to U.S. patent law in over 50 years. After months of debate in both the House and the Senate, the America Invents Act (House Bill H.R. 1249(opens in a new window)) is law.

Only time will tell, however, if the act lives up to its talking points. The act certainly favors larger entities that have the resources to quickly obtain sufficient data that will enable them to be first at the patent office. Accordingly, the bill greatly places small companies, independent entrepreneurs and universities at a disadvantageous position.

These small entities will be pressured to gather as much data as quickly as possible so that they can be first to file a patent application with sufficient support for broad claims. Because derivation proceedings would likely be very costly and time-consuming, these entities will be more inclined to eschew such options in favor for maintain their inventions as secrets until the patent is filed. This will likely slow the dissemination of information, especially in academia.

As for current patent owners, this bill offers a mixed bag. On the one hand, patent owners can avail themselves of supplemental examination in an effort to remedy any potential inequitable conduct problems that may have occurred during the original prosecution of the patent. In addition, as the "best mode" requirement is abolished, alleged infringers will no longer be able to use is as a weapon to defeat issued patents. On the other hand, alleged infringers will have an additional defense of "prior commercial use" and will no longer be exposed to an inference of willful infringement for "failure to obtain advice of counsel."

© 2012 Bracewell & Giuliani LLP

About the Author

Associate

Mr. Hance focuses his practice on energy and intellectual property litigation, with an emphasis on complex commercial disputes relating to energy-supply agreements, and particularly, ISDA Master Agreements, in the oil & gas, liquefied natural gas (LNG), trading & marketing, renewable, solar, chemical, and petrochemical industries. His litigation practice also includes cases of patent infringement, trademark infringement, false-marking, and misappropriation of trade secrets in the areas of software, open-source code, mobile devices, computer hardware, gTLDs (...

713.221.1125
Partner

Dr. Samardzija’s practice focuses on the prosecution of patents in biotechnology and the lifesciences, specifically physiology, molecular biology, cell biology, immunology, pharmaceuticals, biologics and diagnostics.

Dr. Samardzija served as Director of Intellectual Property at The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center's Office of Technology Commercialization. During his tenure, Dr. Samardzija reviewed over 300 invention disclosures and filed over 100 provisional patent applications. One of the high points...

713-221-1112

About the Author

Partner

Jeffrey Whittle has experience representing clients in various technology-based transactions, including licenses, agreements for technology development, transfer, acquisition, joint development, collaboration, product development, strategic alliance, collaboration, and product distribution, as well as various other intellectual property agreements in the software, telecommunications, mechanical/electrical, e-commerce, financial, energy and medical industries.

Mr. Whittle also has experience representing clients in various patent, trademark,...

713-221-1185

Contributors

Partner

Constance Rhebergen is a registered patent attorney who counsels and represents business clients in the protection, maintenance, licensing and transfer of intellectual property assets and in providing patent infringement and validity opinions. Ms. Rhebergen leverages her experience in litigating patent, trademark and copyright infringement cases, Internet domain name cases, trade secrets, unfair competition, as well as counseling on the protection of intellectual property assets in acquisitions and financial restructuring.

Ms. Rhebergen advises...

713-221-3306

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.