Focused Learning and Deep Dives for all IP Professionals In a fast changing world where technologies have followed suit, IP professionals around the world face the challenge of acquiring the right tools to fully protect cutting edge innovations. To be held at the Omni Rancho Las Palmas in Rancho Mirage, CA. Registration opens soon! Book your hotel today!

Tentative schedule posted, subject to change. To be held at the The Roosevelt in New Orleans, LA. More information coming soon!

To be held at the Gaylord National Resort and Convention Center in National Harbor, MD.

Have you or a client ever been faced with a Final Rejection they did not agree with and asked the question, should we go to appeal? Deciding whether to appeal is a rather consequential decision, both in time and money. To help you answer this question, the panel provide you with novel appeal data and discuss how this data can be incorporated into best practices appeal strategy to maximize your effective use of ex parte appeals. This talk aims to help you improve the efficiency and effectiveness of your patent prosecution practice through a strategic and data driven use of ex parte appeals.

On December 1, 2021, the American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) and the Intellectual Property Owners Association (IPO) submitted a joint letter to House Committee members Chair DeLauro, Ranking Member Granger, Chair Cartwright, and Ranking Member Aderholt expressing concern regarding resources appropriated to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) in FY 2022. The joint letter urged the House to pass a funding measure that reflects the intent of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act to fund the USPTO at a level equal to fee collection estimates.

On November 30, 2021, the American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) submitted a letter to Chair Richard J. Durbin and Ranking Member Charles E. Grassley of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary in support of Katherine (Kathi) Vidal’s nomination of Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). The letter outlined components of the set of criteria that AIPLA used to address the needed qualifications for an individual appointed to serve as the leader of the USPTO, concluding that Ms. Vidal possesses such qualifications.

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued a final rule to delay the effective date of the non-DOCX filing fee for an additional calendar year, until January 1, 2023. The fee adjustment would apply to any nonprovisional utility patent application filed under 35 U.S.C. 111, including any continuing application, that is not filed in DOCX format. The USPTO noted that this delay allows applicants additional time to adjust to filing patent applications in the new format and also enables the USPTO to conduct further testing of its systems. AIPLA was at the fore of expressing concern to the USPTO about requiring patent applications to be filed exclusively in a DOCX format, noting the potentially significant impact on its members and the system.

On June 29, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled to keep the doctrine of assignor estoppel, but with limits on its application. This ruling is consistent with the amicus brief filed by AIPLA on March 1, 2021.

On June 21, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed and vacated the Federal Circuit decision, dividing 5-4 on the judgment in United States v. Arthrex, Inc. In this majority opinion, the Supreme Court held that the unreviewable authority wielded by Administrative Patent Judges (APJs) during inter partes review is constitutionally incompatible with their appointment by the Secretary of Commerce to an inferior office.

On April 5, 2021, the US Supreme Court overturned Oracle’s copyright win over Google, holding that Google’s use of Oracle’s programming code from the Java SE Application Programming Interface (API) in their Android platform was a fair use and did not violate copyright laws. The Court determined that Google’s use of only the code that was needed to allow programmers to work in a new and transformative program was a fair use of that material. Writing for a 6-2 majority, Justice Breyer declined to address the first question on copyrightability and instead resolved the case focusing on the question of fair use by referencing the four guiding factors in the Copyright Act’s fair use provision. Justice Thomas filed a dissenting opinion that the ruling bypasses the question of whether the software code is protected by the Copyright Act. AIPLA filed an amicus brief in this case on January 13, 2020.