May 25, 2012

USPTO Announces Effective Dates of America Invents Act

The U.S. Patent Office has announced the effective dates of the America Invents Act.  The U.S. Patent Office interprets the effective dates of some of the provisions of the Act as occurring one day before the day we provided in our previous client alert summarizing key provisions of the Act.  The effective dates for first-to-file, post grant review, transitional post grant review for business method patents, and pre-issuance prior art submissions by third parties, which are all either 12 months or 18 months from enactment, are all one day earlier than the day reported in our previous client alert.  Below is an updated summary of the effective dates of some key provisions of the Act. 

First-to-File – effective March 16, 2013

Prioritized Examination – effective September 26, 2011

15 Percent Fee Increase – effective September 26, 2011

Post Grant Review

  • Post Grant Review - applies to patents issued from applications having an effective filing date of March 16, 2013 and later
  • Inter Partes Review - effective September 16, 2012 and applies to all patents regardless of the application filing date
  • Ex Parte Reexamination - current ex parte reexamination provisions remain effective

Transitional Post Grant Review for Business Method Patents – effective September 16, 2012 and applies to any business method patent regardless of issue date

Pre-issuance Prior Art Submissions by Third Parties– effective September 16, 2012 and applies to any patent application regardless of filing date

False Marking – effective September 16, 2011

Virtual Marking – effective September 16, 2011

Prior User Defense – effective September 16, 2011 and available to all patents issued on or after September 16, 2011

Tax Avoidance Strategies within Prior Art– effective September 16, 2011 and applies to any patent o  r patent application regardless of filing date

© MICHAEL BEST & FRIEDRICH LLP

About the Author

Partner

Richard Kaiser is a partner in our Intellectual Property Practice Group, focusing on patent prosecution for the mechanical arts and having extensive experience with both utility and design patents. Mr. Kaiser works closely with clients to provide meaningful and practical guidance on both U.S. and foreign patent strategies. He is proficient with all steps of the patenting process, from initial patentability searching and analysis, to patent application drafting, and finally with the nuances of prosecuting the pending patent applications before the various patent offices. Mr. Kaiser also...

262-956-6576

About the Author

Attorney

Alan Cheslock is an attorney in the Milwaukee office and a member of the Intellectual Property Practice Group. 

414-225-2741

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.