Continuing Legal Education (CLE)

AIPLA CLE Webinar: Your Competitor Got A Patent - Now What? Can you Invalidate it in Europe and the US

April 8, 2021 12:30 PM to 2:00 PM

Credits

1.5 CLE Credits Available

Registration

Fee: No Fee to attend for AIPLA members. There is a fee for CLE processing.

Register Now

The webinar is a fourth part of a five-part-series designed to provide a comprehensive review of various aspects of the US and EP patent prosecution - from patent eligibility issues, via examination and appeal, to post-grant reviews and litigation. The corresponding laws are explained and illustrated using practical examples pointing to the hurdles that the prosecutors in each of the jurisdictions struggle to overcome.
 
The fourth part is about ways to challenge validity of granted patents. A grant of a patent can bring contentment or fear. The type of feeling depends on the perspective. If a patentee received a patent (or is about to receive a patent), then the competitors may fear that the patentee could bring infringement suits against them. Hence, the competitors may wonder whether the patent can be invalidated and if so, how this can be done. A wide variety of options in the US and Europe include Post Grant Proceedings, Oppositions, Nullity Suits, Reissue proceedings, and Limitation Procedures. However, choosing the particular option under the specific circumstances is not easy. This webinar provides guidance in choosing the most suitable option.
 
Presented by: Malgorzata Kulczycka of Hickman Palermo Becker and Bingham LLP and Eric-Michael Dokter of VJP mbB, Germany, and VJP LLP


This event is free to AIPLA members who are not requesting CLEStandard webinar pricing applies to those requesting CLE. CLE is included for our All Access Pass holders and Corporate Subscribers.

Pricing below only applies to those requesting CLE

site pricing covid

In response to Covid-19, AIPLA has put in-place a new process for Multiple Attendee Site registrations that allows each site registrant to participate in the webinar independently.


Special rate for AIPLA SOLO PRACTICE/SMALL FIRM MEMBERS:  $65
Special rate for AIPLA STUDENT MEMBERS:  $10


Registration includes:

  • For multiple-attendee sites, each registered participant will receive individual logins due to Covid-19 social distancing requirements.
  • CLE certification/processing for applicable states.  Reference CLE Information below for complete details.  
  • Webinar materials, including complete CLE processing information, accessible 24-48 hours before webinar date.

Cancellation Policy:

To get full refund, registrant must request refund five (5) days prior to live event. If less than five (5) days, registrant is transferred to product. 

System requirements: 

Webinar access is compatible with any Windows 7 or later computer, Android OS devices, or Apple/iOS devices.  Check system compatibility here.

Accessibility for hearing impaired:

AIPLA’s webinars are available and accessible to individuals who are hearing impaired. If anyone at your location would like to know more about accommodations, please contact cle@aipla.org. We ask that you let us know at least 7 business days out from the webinar, to ensure that we can identify and deploy the solution that best fits our registrants needs.


CLE INFORMATION 

AIPLA is a pre-approved CLE provider with the following states:

  • Alaska
  • California
  • New Hampshire
  • New Mexico
  • New York
  • Pennsylvania
  • Vermont

AIPLA has applied for CLE accreditation in the following states: 

  • Alabama
  • Florida
  • Illinois
  • Indiana
  • Minnesota
  • Ohio
  • Tennessee
  • Texas
  • Virginia
  • Washington
 
For information on CLE accreditation in all other states, please contact our CLE Department at cle@aipla.org.  CLE credit may be available, but will require additional time for approval and COA delivery.


CLE Restrictions: 

ATTENTION attorneys in Louisiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Utah

These states mandate attorneys can only view a webinar independently at their own computer to receive CLE credit.  Multiple attendees prohibited.

ATTENTION attorneys in Arizona

Arizona does not certify courses or providers. Arizona lawyers are required to independently review AZ's regulations and make their own determination that it qualifies for credit towards their MCLE requirements. MCLE Regulation 104(A) identifies the standards to apply.  AIPLA will email an attendance affidavit to registrants requesting AZ CLE credit after the webinar.

ATTENTION attorneys in New Hampshire

New Hampshire attendees must self-determine whether a program is eligible for credit, and self-report their attendance according to NH Supreme Court Rule 53.  The New Hampshire Minimum Continuing Legal Education (NHMCLE) Board does not approve or accredit CLE activities for the NH Minimum CLE requirement.  AIPLA will email an attendance affidavit to registrants requesting NH CLE credit after the webinar.   


 Disclaimer:  AIPLA is a nonprofit national bar association.  The sole purpose of this CLE program is to provide educational and informational content.  AIPLA does not provide legal services or advice.  The opinions, views and other statements expressed by contributors to this CLE program are solely those of the contributors.  These opinions, views and statements of the contributors do not necessarily represent those of AIPLA and should not be construed as such.


 

Add to:

 

 

News

  • GoogleVOracle Supreme Court Overturns Oracle Copyright Win Regarding Programming Code, Holds Fair Use

    April 5, 2021

    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.
  • TRIPSWaiver-March30-logo Letter Submitted to the Office of the US Trade Representative Supporting US Opposition to TRIPS Waiver Proposal

    March 30, 2021

    On March 30, 2021, AIPLA, alongside three other organizations, submitted a letter to the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative to express support for the United States’ opposition to the TRIPS waiver proposal being discussed at the World Trade Organization (WTO). The letter points out that the TRIPS waiver proposal would waive a variety of IP rights related “to prevention, containment or treatment” of COVID-19. The proposal incorrectly portrays IP as a barrier, but it is expressed, to the contrary, that IP protection enhances developments. The letter states that there are no known examples where IP has been used to limit access to COVID-related technology ‒ rather innovator companies have partnered and shared IP to create tools to address the pandemic. Should the proposed TRIPS waiver be implemented, it is noted that it would have an immediate chilling effect on continued research and necessary collaboration.
  • CNIPA-Comments-March26-logo AIPLA Comments on the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) Administrative Adjudication Measures for Early Resolution Mechanism for Drug Patent Disputes

    March 26, 2021

    On March 26, 2021, AIPLA submitted comments regarding the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) Administrative Adjudication Measures for Early Resolution Mechanism for Drug Patent Disputes. In the comments, AIPLA requests clarification of handling of patent invalidity challenges, since substantial ambiguity remains. AIPLA requests an 8-month deadline to complete the adjudication in the Draft Measures, and requests extensions of notice periods and filing deadlines. AIPLA also requests that the Draft Measures include a corresponding provision providing that if a case has been accepted by either CNIPA or the People’s Court, any case subsequently filed in the other tribunal shall not be accepted on the same asserted claims. Finally, AIPLA requests that all possible appeals have been resolved or the time within which to appeal has expired without an appeal being filed.
  • Statement Against Violence AIPLA Statement Against Violence

    March 23, 2021

    As a community, we stand together in condemning the acts of violence against Asian Americans that have occurred over the past year. Recent events are an awful reminder that much work remains. We must unite to support each other, both personally and professionally, now more than ever. Let us ensure that AIPLA and the entire IP community are places where we listen to and value each other’s experiences and perspectives.
  • DCA-Comments-March21-logo AIPLA Submits Comments in Response to the Discussion Draft of The Digital Copyright Act (“DCA”)

    March 22, 2021

    On March 22, 2021, AIPLA submitted comments to Senator Thom Tillis in response to the discussion draft of The Digital Copyright Act (“DCA”) of 2021. AIPLA’s comments largely mirror and reflect AIPLA’s positions expressed on prior occasions, with comments directed to the concepts addressed and not to any specific proposed language. AIPLA’s comments support the concept of advancing the DMCA towards a “notice-and-staydown” regime. AIPLA also advocates further study into the use of a standardized unique identifier that would more effectively identify content.