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!

AIPLA’s 2022 VIRTUAL Patent Prosecution Boot Camp is a comprehensive, CLE-accredited virtual seminar that includes instructional lecture-style sessions with practical tips on US and international patent preparation and prosecution, as well as hands-on interactive workshops that will walk you through drafting claims and responding to office actions.

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

The panel’s goal is to review the most current issues facing practitioners on both sides of the Atlantic and consider practical solutions to try and navigate or mitigate those challenges. Andrew Bentham (JA Kemp) and Courtenay Brinckerhoff (Foley & Lardner) intend to address issues facing Innovators in the Life Sciences/Biotech areas including written description and subject matter eligibility, with Andrew focusing on the EPO and Courtenay on the USPTO. Mike Jennings (AA Thornton) and Michael Piper (Conley Rose) will jointly consider the new guidelines in the EPO and compare EPO and US Guidance Examples to assess ideas for effective specification and claim drafting for AI/ML and computer simulation and computer-implemented inventions more generally in Europe and the US. ​

This year’s panel of experts will leverage decades of deep litigation experience in patent- and other IP-related matters to provide webinar attendees with additional insight on recent cases from the perspectives of private practice litigators and testifying experts. In a conversational format, our panel will address issues of high importance from several of 2021’s most interesting IP damages cases. Among other topics, our panel will discuss recent developments in apportionment, admissibility, damages attributable to use outside the U.S., facts relevant to the hypothetical negotiation, lost profits, and ethics.

Experts from Europe, Japan, the UK, and the US share global and country-jurisdiction experiences on negotiating “fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory” (FRAND) licenses for the use of “standard essential patents” (SEPs)—for smart phones, smart cars, and other digital products and services. Current and evolving mechanisms to achieve FRAND licenses will be discussed—ranging from incentives for closing deals by amicable negotiation, court-imposed remedies like injunctions, royalty rate-setting, and damages, to alternative dispute resolution like mediation and arbitration. Meanwhile, the panel will address views on SEPs debated within various government authorities, with examples from Japan.

On December 16, 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 Judge Leonard P. Stark’s nomination of Circuit Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The letter outlined the Association’s White Paper (“Recommendations Regarding Nomination of Judges to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit” dated September 2018), concluding that Judge Stark not only meets the criteria, but would bring essential experience to the Court. The letter provides an enthusiastic endorsement of Judge Stark, urging the Senate to move forward with his confirmation.

On December 16, 2021, The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) indefinitely delayed implementation of the voluntary continuing legal education (CLE) certification for registered patent practitioners and individuals granted limited recognition to practice before the USPTO in patent matters. The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) assembled a joint committee task force to ensure that the proposed rules did not disproportionately impact patent agents and other practitioners for whom CLE self-certification would be a significant burden and/or legal risk, and to ensure that practitioners were made aware of requirements for the registration statement and the CLE self-certification.

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 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.