Speedy Patent Prosecution, Part Two: Accelerated Examination

The previous post in this series covered Track One prioritized examination, a USPTO program with a substantial fee, but no additional preparation required for the application. This post details a very different method of speedy prosecution: the Accelerated Examination Program.

Like Track One, the Accelerated Examination Program has a stated goal of completing examination within 12 months of filing. But the similarities end there. Accelerated Examination has only a small fee, but a significant preparatory burden that entails its own attorney ...

Continue Reading →

Speedy Patent Prosecution, Part One: Track One Prioritized Examination

The USPTO has a number of different programs to allow for speedier prosecution of patent applications. Each expedited prosecution path has their own qualifications, advantages, and disadvantages. This series of posts will cover some of these programs in detail. First up is Track One.

USPTO’s Track One prioritized examination is a special program for speedy examination of nonprovisional utility and plant patent applications. To be eligible, applications must have no more than four independent claims and 30 total claims, and must ...

Continue Reading →

USPTO announces revised fee schedule effective January 1, 2014

The USPTO has announced a revised fee schedule that reduces patent issue fees, reduces Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) fees*, and eliminates electronically filed assignment fees and publication fees. These fees will go into effect on January 1, 2014.

For large entities, the issue fees for a utility patent will be reduced by $1,120. The utility issue fee will be lowered from $1,780 to $960, and the $300 publication fee will be eliminated.

For small entities, the issue fees for a utility patent ...

Continue Reading →

Software Patents Update: Accenture Global Services v. Guidewire Software

The Federal Circuit remains divided over the patent eligibility of computer-related inventions. In CLS Bank Int’l v. Alice Corp., Chief Judge Randall Rader and Judge Alan Lourie set forth disparate tests for subject matter eligibility. Later, in Ultramercial, Inc. v. Hulu, LLC, Federal Circuit judges concurred in upholding Ultramercial’s internet-related patents, but disagreed on the rationale for doing so. And most recently, in Accenture Global Services, GmbH v. Guidewire Software, Inc., they differed on whether a computer insurance application was ...

Continue Reading →

Third-Party Prior Art Submissions Expanded Under America Invents Act

A “preissuance submission” is a procedure by which a third party submits published material to the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) as a claim of prior art against an inventor’s patent application.

The America Invents Act (AIA) of 2011 expanded the role of preissuance submissions by lengthening the time period during which they are permitted and by broadening submitters’ ability to comment on the specific relevancy of their submissions.

Preissuance submissions are permitted for any nonprovisional utility, design, or plant ...

Continue Reading →
Page 3 of 3 123