• Sign In
  • Create Account
  • Sign Out
  • My Account
  • Home
  • The Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Digital Edition
    • CIAdvanced Digital Edition
    • Subscribe
    • Archives
  • News
  • Features
  • Resources
    • Advertiser Index
    • Blogs
    • Raw and Manufactured Materials Overview
    • eNewsletters
    • Classifieds & Services Marketplace
    • Buyers' Connection
    • List Rental
    • Market Trends
    • Material Properties Charts
    • Custom Content & Marketing Services
    • CI Top 12
    • Virtual Supplier Brochures
  • Directories
    • Data Book & Buyers Guide
    • Ceramic Components Directory
    • Materials Handbook
    • Equipment Digest
    • R&D Lab Equipment and Instrumentation
    • Services Directory
  • CI Home
Home » Post-Issuance Challenges to Patent Validity
Advanced CeramicsCI Advanced FeaturesIP in DepthColumnsGlassRefractories
IP in Depth

Post-Issuance Challenges to Patent Validity

The USPTO instituted a collection of post-issuance review procedures that allow patentees and third parties to challenge the validity of patents.

IP in Depth, Michael Gzybowski
June 1, 2016
Michael Gzybowski
KEYWORDS innovation / intellectual property / patents
Reprints
No Comments

More than 30 years ago when I started my career as a patent examiner in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), there was a common phrase that went something like this: “Patents are not valid until they are litigated.” Back then, a seasoned patent examiner would have seven hours to study a patent application before spending hours in examiner search rooms looking through paper copies of issued U.S. patents (and a scant number of foreign patents) and miscellaneous “prior art collections,” some of which were privately maintained and not always shared with examiners.

Prior art searching involved reading the abstracts on the faces of issued patents, looking at the drawings and cursorily checking portions of the text as needed. Copies of issued patents that seemed relevant and needed more thorough review were removed from the search rooms and taken back to the examiner’s office to study while writing up Office Actions. After spending three to four hours studying an application and “pulling” prior art references, an examiner would have the limited remaining time to thoroughly analyze each of the relevant prior art references and apply them to the claims of an application while also examining formal matters and writing up an Office Action. Upon receiving an amendment in response to an Office Action, the examiner would have another seven hours to search the prior art, study a patent applicant’s amendments and arguments, and issue a second Office Action or allow an application.

In my career outside the USPTO, several other patent attorneys and I were sent to the public search room at the Patent Office to search for prior art to invalidate a particular patent. We easily spent 40-60 hours uncovering and analyzing prior art that was never considered by the examiner issuing the patent we were intent to invalidate. Based on the limited time an examiner had to conduct an examination of a patent application, and the fact that, at any given time, prior art copies pulled by examiners were not placed back in the search rooms for days (adversely affecting the integrity of the search facilities), it seemed reasonable to accept that constraints on the examination process could impact the validity of issued patents.

 

Modern-Day Drawbacks

In today’s information age, examiner search rooms and paper copies of patents have been replaced with computers. One may think that would make the work easier and more efficient, but it is questionable if modernization of the examination process itself has improved the quality of issued patents. Today’s examiners rely on computer searching to identify and assess prior art references, and examine application papers on computer screens for 8-10 hours/day. Text searching for prior art is inherently subject to using proper and alternative search terms. Assessing prior art and examining patent applications on computer screens for extended periods of time is fatiguing. Moreover, intense reading on a computer monitor can cause work mistakes and lost productivity.

All issued U.S. patent are accorded a “presumption of validity” in courts. However, the “presumption of validity” of a patent has little respect outside the courts. It is a common, highly recommended practice for practitioners to independently verify the validity of patents before asserting patent rights or before a buyer acquires patent rights by purchase or licensing.

 

New Procedures

In order to create an alternative to litigation and improve the quality of patents, the USPTO instituted a collection of post issuance review procedures that allow patentees and third parties to challenge the validity of patents within the jurisdiction of USPTO. Inter Partes Review (IPR) is a new trial proceeding conducted at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) of the USPTO to review the patentability of one or more claims in an issued patent based on prior art consisting of patents or printed publications. Post Grant Review (PGR) is a trial proceeding conducted at the PTAB of the USPTO to review the patentability of one or more claims in an issued patent that is not limited to challenges based on prior art. Business Method Patent Review (BMPR) is similar to PGR, but requires that the petitioner has been charged with infringement of the patent at issue. In addition to providing cost-efficient alternatives to litigation, IPR, PGR and BMPR all allow the presumption of validity of patents to be challenged, tested, and verified by the USPTO and thus improve patent quality at the USPTO level.  


Any views or opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and do not represent those of Ceramic Industry, its staff, Editorial Advisory Board or BNP Media.

Did you enjoy this article? Click here to subscribe to Ceramic Industry Magazine.

Recent Articles by Michael Gzybowski

IP Makes America Great

Track One Prioritized Examination

Taking Advantage of the Post-Prosecution Pilot Program

Using Examiner Interviews to Advance Patent Applications

Michael-gzybowski-107px

Michael Gzybowski, counsel at Brinks Gilson & Lione, concentrates his practice on patent prosecution, providing support for patent litigation and counseling clients on patentability, infringement and validity issues, and licensing agreements. Gzybowski has more than 30 years of experience, including his work as a patent examiner at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. He can be reached at (734) 302-6046 or mgzybowski@usebrinks.com.

Related Articles

IP in Depth: Unscrupulous Activities of Non-Practicing Entities Continue

IP in Depth: Understanding Supplemental Patent Examinations

Taking Advantage of the Post-Prosecution Pilot Program

IP in Depth: Evaluating Patent Examiners

Related Products

Ceramic Integration and Joining Technologies: From Macro to Nanoscale

Handbook of Advanced Ceramics Machining

Optimizing Social Media from a B2B Perspective

Ceramic Industry Materials Handbook

Related Events

Ceramics Expo 2018

Global Composites

expoAIR: International Aerospace Supply Chain and Technology

ceramitec 2018

Related Directories

Innovnano-Advanced Materials S.A.

CoorsTek

Morgan Advanced Materials

Zircoa Inc.

You must login or register in order to post a comment.

Report Abusive Comment

Subscribe For Free!
  • Print & Digital Edition Subscriptions
  • eNewsletters
  • Online Registration
  • Customer Service

More Videos

CI directories

Products

Handbook of Advanced Ceramics Machining

Handbook of Advanced Ceramics Machining

Ceramics, with their unique properties and diverse applications, hold the potential to revolutionize many industries, including automotive and semiconductors.

See More Products

CI raw and manufactured materials

Ceramic Industry Magazine

CI August 2017 Cover

2017 August

The summer's heating up in our August issue! Check out articles on Industry 4.0 projects, drying considerations, physical vapor deposition coatings, and more.
View More Subscribe
  • Resources
    • Advertiser Index
    • List Rental
    • Custom Content & Marketing Services
    • Manufacturing Group
    • Partners
    • Want More?
    • Connect
    • Privacy Policy

Copyright ©2017. All Rights Reserved BNP Media.

Design, CMS, Hosting & Web Development :: ePublishing