SlideShare une entreprise Scribd logo
1  sur  88
Télécharger pour lire hors ligne
Patent Basics for Emerging Companies

         Maria Laccotripe Zacharakis, Ph.D.
                           Thomas Hoover
                             Daniel J. Kelly
                   McCarter & English, LLP

            Cambridge Innovation Center
                        March 20, 2013
BOSTON // HARTFORD // NEW YORK // NEWARK // STAMFORD // PHILADELPHIA // WILMINGTON




Introduction to Intellectual Property
                             Maria Laccotripe Zacharakis, Ph.D.
                             Thomas O. Hoover
                             McCarter & English, LLP

                             Cambridge Innovation Center
                             March 20, 2013
The
Journey
  of a
 Patent
Step 1:


Discovery!


             4
Step 2
Document discovery in lab notebook




                   5
Step 3

File Invention Disclosure Form with patent
                committee.




                       6
Step 4
  Patent Committee Discussion

 Can invention be commercialized?
 Search for prior art
 Proceed with patent application



                         7
Step 5
                Preparation of Patent Application




 Meet with patent attorney  Draft application  Review and edit application




                                          8
Step 6
File application with patent office




                    9
Step 7
Review of application by patent
          examiner




                 10
Step 8
Rebut the position of the examiner



              This process goes back and
                  forth several times




                  11
Step 9


    Patent is granted



    12
What is Intellectual Property?


♦ Intellectual property is a blanket term
  covering areas of the law dealing with the
  protection of property which “springs from
  the mind.”




                        13
Why is Intellectual Property Important?

♦ Product development makes it essential that the
  results of these efforts go as far and as long as
  possible
♦ Protection for protectable new products is essential
  – Without protection, new products may be reverse
    engineered or knocked off freely (i.e., doing research and
    development for competition)
♦ Patents are valuable
  – Licensing
  – Fundraising
                                  14
Types of Intellectual Property

♦ Patents
  – Disclose to the benefit of society in return for a
    exclusionary period of substantial duration
♦ Copyrights
  – Protect the expression of your ideas
♦ Trademarks
  – Protect your goodwill in the marketplace
♦ Trade Secrets
  – Keep commercially valuable information from your
    competitors (if you can do so effectively)
                                    15
What is a patent?


♦ A patent is a property right granted by the
  government which gives the patent holder
  the right to exclude others from making,
  selling or using the invention claimed in
  the patent.


                        16
Types of patents

♦ Utility patents
  – Cover anything having an actual use – e.g.
    machines, processes, compositions of matter
♦ Design patents
  – Cover ornamental product designs
♦ Plant patents
  – For distinct and new varieties of plants that have
    been invented or discovered and asexually
    reproduced.

                               17
Types of patents

♦ First Generation patents
  – Protect first generation products and platform
    technology
♦ Second Generation patents
  – Protect where you and your competitors will go once
    your product hits the market
♦ Others
  – Offensive patents
  – FDA Label patents, etc.
                              18
Requirements for patentability


♦   Utility
♦   Novelty
♦   Non-obviousness/Inventive Step
♦   Written Description
♦   Enablement



                        19
Requirements for patentability:
             Utility


♦ Invention must have some useful
  purpose




                     20
Requirements for patentability:
            Novelty

♦ To obtain a patent, the invention cannot,
  before the date of invention/date of filing
  (AIA), be:
  – Patented
  – Known or used by others
  – Described in a publication

      Some exceptions under the AIA
                           21
Requirements for patentability:
  Non-obviousness/Inventive Step
♦ Invention must not have been obvious to
  one of ordinary skill in the art to which the
  invention pertains
♦ Don’t rely on arguments, plan to obtain
  data demonstrating unexpected results
  over the art
  – It can be difficult to anticipate what an examiner will
    consider to be the closest art, so be prepared to run
    experiments to support patentability

                                 22
Requirements for patentability:
       Enablement/Written Description

♦ Enable any person skilled in the art to make
  and use the invention
  – Examples are the best defense against enablement issues


♦ The specification must…
  – Describe the claimed invention
      No new matter can be added after filing
      Problems typically arise when amending the claims


                               23
Patentable Subject Matter
♦ Examples of subject matter appropriate for
  patenting include:
  –   Drugs and Biologics (e.g., new compounds, prodrugs)
  –   Formulations (e.g., new forms, carriers)
  –   Delivery Vehicles (e.g., matrices, nanoparticles)
  –   Medical Devices (e.g., catheters, bone screws)
  –   Methods of Treatment (e.g., new regimens or profiles)
  –   New Treatments (e.g., new uses for old drugs)
  –   Diagnostics (e.g., urine tests)
  –   New Designs (e.g., product or packaging design)


                                      24
What is an “Invention”?

♦ An invention exists when…
  – Conception is complete, and
  – The invention is reduced to practice
     Both can happen at the same time




                           25
What is an Invention:
              Conception
♦ Conception has been held to be complete
  only when the idea is so clearly defined in the
  inventor’s mind that only ordinary skill would
  be necessary to reduce the invention to
  practice, without extensive research or
  experimentation




                           26
What is an Invention:
          Reduction to practice
♦ An invention has been reduced to practice
  when…
  – It has been built or practiced sufficiently to
    show that it would work as claimed, or
  – An enabling patent application has been filed




                            27
Inventorship

♦ Only persons who contribute to the conception
  of the “claimed” invention may be named as
  inventors
♦ If a collaborator merely conducts
  experimentation dictated by another’s specific
  idea, he is not an inventor, even if the tasks he
  undertakes require skill and creative thought.


                             28
Inventorship

♦ However, if a collaborator aids in developing
  the specific idea itself or through his
  experimentation significantly refines the
  original idea as to make it different from the
  originally conceived idea, he has added to the
  conception and should be named as an
  inventor



                          29
Documenting the Invention

♦ Under the AIA, the US is no longer a “first to invent”
  system. However, still important to

♦ File invention disclosures
♦ Maintain a laboratory notebook…
   – Documents the inventive process
   – Serves as the source of experimental data for patent
     claims, patent examples, proof of concept, etc.


                                  30
Note Keeping:
♦ Recording conception
  – Clearly record facts surrounding invention
♦ Recording continuity
  – Clearly note any intervals in research
♦ Witnessing
  – Each page of lab notebook should be:
      signed and dated information was recorded
      signed and dated by a witness on the date information
       was recorded


                                  31
Note Keeping:

♦ Recording disclosures to others
♦ Speculation
  – Speculation regarding other embodiments of the
    invention, possible other uses, etc. should be
    recorded as this will assist in sizing up and fleshing
    out the invention (speculation could lead to other
    inventions)



                                 32
When to Patent
♦ The general rule is that one must file a patent application
  before an enabling, non-confidential disclosure is made or
  before a product is offered for sale
   – Printed publications, published patent applications
   – Disclosures to other companies, abstracts
   – On-line releases of information
♦ Accordingly, a disclosure to another party without a
  confidentiality agreement can constitute an enabling
  disclosure and may bar patent protection in many
  jurisdictions
   – Some jurisdictions have limited grace periods, but the
     circumstances are very narrow – don’t count on it
                                       33
When to Patent
♦ While the US has a limited grace period, don’t count
  on it
  – It does not prevent a rival patent filing
  – You can’t get you priority back in most jurisdictions, and
    possibly not even in the US, depending on what was
    disclosed
♦ Confidentiality/Material Transfer agreements are
  great, but only get you a breach of contract claim



                                   34
When to Patent
♦ Another area where there is a problem about enabling
  disclosure is talks at conferences
   – An oral presentation can be a bar in some countries
   – In addition, the dates of abstracts (which are often published
     or available on-line before the meeting) and poster session
     may be deemed a written disclosure
♦ Another problem area is grant proposals. Once funded,
  government organizations publish the abstracts,
  sometimes even if you tell them not to without additional
  review.

                                    35
Due Diligence:
  Checklist


        36
Due Diligence:
                         Checklist
♦ I. Intellectual Property Portfolio
   –   Scope and Status
   –   Inventorship and Ownership
   –   Formalities
   –   Foreign Filing
   –   Priority Contests/Derivation v. First to Invent & First to File
   –   Other Related Applications in the Portfolio
♦ II. Actual or Threatened Adverse Proceedings Involving Third
  Parties
♦ III. Advice on Freedom to Operate
♦ IV. License or other Agreements with Third Parties
♦ V. Key Personnel
♦ VI. Data                         37
Due Diligence:
    Intellectual Property Portfolio
♦ Scope and Status
  – This includes…
      a list of all the intellectual property that the target
       company owns, controls, or has access to that is
       within the scope of the proposed transaction
      A list of any 3rd party intellectual property covering
       the target company.
      Access to the complete file histories of all issued
       patents and pending patent applications owned,
       controlled, or licensed by the target

                                  38
Due Diligence:
    Intellectual Property Portfolio
♦ Inventorship and Ownership
  – Are you aware of…
      Any individual who believes that he or she was
       incorrectly omitted from inventorship (consultants,
       outside contractors, etc.)
      Any claim by a third party that believes it has a right of
       ownership in an application or patent
      Any inventor who has an obligation to assign to a third
       party
      Any funding arrangements which would give another
       party an interest in the target company’s portfolio

                                    39
Due Diligence:
    Intellectual Property Portfolio
♦ Formalities
  – Account for all documents establishing title-
    ownership/licensee rights for all the IP owned,
    controlled or licensed by the target company and
    establish whether or not…
      These IP documents remain in good standing
      All assignments were filed and recorded
      All filing receipts are in order
      Maintenance and other fees have been paid
      All relevant applications are pending (i.e., not
       abandoned)
                                40
Due Diligence:
    Intellectual Property Portfolio
♦ Foreign Filing
  – In what jurisdictions have steps been taken to
    preserve foreign patent rights?




                           41
Due Diligence:
    Intellectual Property Portfolio
♦ Priority Contests
  – Are you aware of existing or potential priority contests
    involving the claims of the invention?
  – In order to assess the outcome of likely priority
    contests we need the following:
       Evidence of dates of conception and reduction to
        practice of invention
       Any evidence you have of other parties’ dates of
        conception and reduction to practice


                                42
Due Diligence:
    Intellectual Property Portfolio
♦ Priority Contests, cont.
  – Questions to answer:
      What can you tell us about the prior art with
       respect to the claims?
      What can you tell us about any interferences
       past or presently pending?
      What can you tell us about any European
       oppositions part or presently pending? Is
       validity of any of the claims at issue?

                             43
Due Diligence:
    Intellectual Property Portfolio
♦ Priority Contests, cont.
  – Questions to answer:
      What can you tell us about the prior art with
       respect to the claims?
      What can you tell us about any interferences
       part or presently pending?
      What can you tell us about any European
       oppositions part or presently pending? Is
       validity of any of the claims at issue?

                             44
Due Diligence:
       Intellectual Property Portfolio
♦ Other Related Applications in the Portfolio
  – If any other applications have been filed which would support
    the claims, it should be demanded that these applications and
    their prosecution histories be viewed.
  – In order to assess the patentability of the invention, the
    following from other applications which disclose the invention
    are needed:
       Priority documents
       Prosecution files
       All known prior art and copies of any prior art searches
       Summaries of any new data which might be used to
        support the patentability of the claims
                                    45
Due Diligence:
Actual / Threatened Adverse Proceedings

♦ Actual or Threatened Adverse Proceedings
  Involving Third Parties
  – The following information is required:
      Information regarding any actual or threatened IP lawsuits
       affecting the patent portfolio
      Information regarding the legal opinions by external legal
       counsel regarding the validity of any third party IP rights that
       might affect the patent portfolio
      Information regarding the legal opinions by external or internal
       counsel regarding whether the activities of any third party
       infringe or would infringe on the subject matter of the patent
       portfolio.

                                      46
Due Diligence:
           Freedom to Operate
♦ Advice on Freedom to Operate
  – Provide information regarding…
      Any potentially dominating patents and, if any,
       search results, legal opinions, memoranda, and/or
       presentations to senior management regarding the
       target company’s freedom to use/test/make their
       product within the patent portfolio.
      Any trademark clearance searches or survey results




                              47
Due Diligence:
             Freedom to Operate
♦ Advice on Freedom to Operate, cont.
  – Questions to be answered:
      Have you been asked to provide a “freedom to use” opinion
       with respect to the practice of the target company’s
       product?
      Have you formed an opinion on whether the practice of the
       target product would infringe a valid claim of a US patent –
       can you say why?
      Have you ever sent a letter asserting infringement of a
       claim of the portfolio?
      Are you aware of any related claims or a third party that
       would prevent practicing steps of the invention?
                                   48
Due Diligence:
  License/Other Agreements with Third
                Parties
♦ License or Other Agreements with Third
  Parties
  – Identify all the products in the program – if any
    products are not being considered for the deal,
    discuss the relationship of these products
  – Have any other third parties licensed and
    subsequently decided not to pursue this
    technology; explain why the program ended


                            49
Due Diligence:
      License/Other Agreements with Third
                    Parties
♦ License or Other Agreements with Third Parties, cont.
  – List licenses or other agreements related to the research, development,
    manufacture, use or sale of the product, including:
       Exclusive and non-exclusive license agreements
       Joint development agreements or joint venture agreements
       Secrecy / confidentiality agreements
       Manufacturing or supply or other service (e.g. testing) agreements
       Consulting agreements
       Sponsored research agreements
       Material transfer agreements
       Technical assistance agreements needed to provide for transfer of
        “know-how” as to a product that affects the collaboration
       Distribution agreements
                                         50
Due Diligence:
                Key Personnel
♦ Key Personnel
  – Provide a list and contact information of all persons
    involved in the prosecution of the IP portfolio and/or
    R&D of the compounds within the portfolio with
    whom we can discuss the proposed transaction.
  – Provide documents that establish the obligations of
    key personnel, including the inventors. Indicate
    whether persons are currently or formerly retained
    by the target company.


                               51
Due Diligence:
                      Data
♦ Data
  – Provide the following:
      information, including a list and summary description, of all
       data relating to completed or ongoing clinical trials, preclinical
       studies, toxicology profiles, and proposed future publications
       related to product or its use in any field.
      Any documents and/or information related to the status and
       ownership of clinical trial data and materials identified above.
  – Have any clinical trials (or relevant IP) been
    funded by third parties, including grants
    (academic or government)?
                                      52
QUESTIONS?

Maria Laccotripe Zacharakis, Ph.D.
     McCarter & English, LLP
          617-449-6512
  Mzacharakis@mccarter.com

       Thomas O. Hoover
     McCarter & English, LLP
         617-449-6572
     Thoover@mccarter.com
                   53
PATENT RIGHTS UNDER GOVERNMENT
            CONTRACTS & GRANTS

                           Daniel J. Kelly
                  McCarter & English, LLP

              Cambridge Innovation Center
                          March 20, 2013
The Bayh-Dole Act – 35 U.S.C. Sections
200-212

♦ Under Bayh-Dole, passed in 1980, small
  businesses and nonprofit entities (including
  universities and research institutions) given
  right to retain title to inventions developed
  under Government funding agreements.




                        55
♦ Bayh-Dole extended by 1983 Presidential
  Memorandum to large businesses and for-
  profit organizations not subject to DOE, NASA
  and NRC funding agreements.
♦ DOE, NASA and NRC are given title by
  statute to any inventions developed under
  funding agreements between large for-profit
  businesses and those agencies; patents
  issued to the United States.

                      56
Applies to Government Contracts, Grants,
and Cooperative Agreements

♦ A Contractor’s Patent Rights are Governed by
  Part 27 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation
  (Title 48 of the CFR) and the Patent Rights
  Clause (52.227-11).
♦ A Grantee’s or Funding Recipient’s Patent
  Rights Are Governed by Title 37 of the Code
  of Federal Regulations and the Patent Rights
  clause (Section 401.14).


                      57
Nature of Government’s Right

♦ Government gets a nonexclusive, irrevocable,
  paid-up license to practice or have practiced
  on its behalf such an invention throughout the
  world.




                       58
Fund Recipient Must Act

♦ Under Bayh-Dole – title can revert to the
  Government if the grantee/contractor fails to
  disclose the invention, fails to elect to retain
  title or fails to file and prosecute a patent
  application within certain prescribed time
  periods. Failure to disclose means
  grantee/contractor loses all rights. Failure to
  elect title – grantee/contractor still gets
  license.

                        59
Definitions

♦ “Invention” (FAR 27.301; 37 CFR 401.2(c))
  – any invention or discovery that is or may be
    patentable or otherwise protectable under the
    Patent laws or any novel variety of plant that is
    or may be protectable under the Plant Variety
    Protection Act




                         60
Definitions

♦ “Subject Invention” (FAR 27.301; 37 CFR
  401.2(d))
  – any invention of the contractor conceived or
    first actually reduced to practice in the
    performance of work under a government
    contract or funding arrangement




                        61
Funding Recipient’s Right to Elect Title

♦ Narrow Exceptions to Recipient’s Right to
  Elect to Retain Title
  – Foreign companies
  – Exceptional circumstances in furtherance of
    policy objectives
  – National security
  – Contracts for government owned R&D or
    production facilities
FAR 27.302(b)(1)-(4); 37 CFR 401.3(a)
                       62
Government’s Rights if Recipient Elects
Title

♦ Government License Rights
  – Minimum: Nonexclusive, nontransferable,
    irrevocable, paid-up license to practice, or have
    practiced for, or on behalf of, the U.S. Government
    throughout the world
  – May have additional rights to sublicense to any
    foreign government or international organization to
    effectuate treaties or international agreements
  – March-In Rights


                         63
March-In Rights

  Where contractor acquires title, government can
  require contractor to license, or the government
  may license to others itself:
      If Contractor has failed to take adequate steps for
       practical application
      To alleviate health or safety concerns
      To meet requirements for public use
      To meet domestic production preference
35 U.S.C. 203; FAR 27.302(f); 37 CFR 401.6;
14(j)
                            64
Failed to Take Adequate Steps

♦ Agencies Permitted to Request Utilization
  Reports (FAR 27.302; 37 CFR 401(h).
♦ NIH requires 12 month reporting on stage of
  development, date of first commercial sale or
  use, number and type of licenses, gross
  income, licensing to small business, status of
  U.S. manufacturing and identification of any
  FDA-approved product names.


                       65
Preference for United States Industry

♦ A Recipient and Exclusive Assignee Must
  Agree that Products Embodying Subject
  Invention be Manufactured Substantially in the
  United States.
♦ Waiver is Permitted On Showing of
  Unsuccessful Attempts or Not Commercially
  Feasible.



                       66
If Recipient Declines Title . . .

♦ Minimum License Rights to Recipient if
  Government Takes Title (FAR 27.301(i); 37
  CFR 401.14(e)
  – Revocable, nonexclusive, royalty-free license
  – Extends to domestic subsidiaries and affiliates
  – Includes right to sublicense
  – Transferable only with agency approval
  – May be revoked or modified by the government
    to achieve expeditious practical application
                       67
Procedural Requirements -- Diclosure

♦ Disclosure in writing (FAR 52.227-11(c); 37 CFR
  401.14(a)(2))
  – Within two months of disclosure by inventor to
    recipient’s personnel responsible for patent
    matters
  – Must identify investor, funding vehicle, sufficient
    technical detail and date of any public disclosure
♦ Implications of Failure to Disclose
  – Forfeiture of all rights
  – Potential liability for Government infringement
                          68
Procedural Requirements – Election to
Retain Title

♦ Recipient must elect in writing to retain title within 2
  years of initial disclosure. FAR 52.227-11(c)(2); 37
  CFR 14.401-14(c)(2).
♦ Exception for When 35 U.S.C. Section 102(b) 1
  Year Statutory Bar Kicks In – Period for Election
  Can be Accelerated to No More Than 60 Days Prior
  to End of Statutory Period.
♦ Effective 3/16/13, AIA Changes Statutory Bar
  Conditions to On-Sale or Public Use Anywhere in
  World.

                           69
Procedural Requirements – Filing the
Patent Application

♦ Must File Provisional or Nonprovisional
  Application within 1 Year of Election
  (Nonprovisional must be within 10 months of
  provisional).
♦ If Statutory Bar Applies, Must File within
  Statutory Bar.
♦ Foreign filings within 10 months of first U.S.
  application .
♦ FAR 52.227-11(c)(3); 37 CFR 401.14(c)(3)
                        70
Effect of AIA “First to File” Rule

♦ Effective March 16, 2013.
♦ As a Practical Matter Collapses Grace Periods
  Inherent in Bayh-Dole if Recipient Wants to
  Avoid Risk of Intervening Prior Art.




                      71
Inventors and their Recipient Employers

♦ Recipient must obtain written agreement from its
  employees to disclose promptly to patent personnel
  subject inventions to comply with notice
  requirements.
♦ Recipient must require all inventors to execute
  papers necessary to file patent applications and
  establish the Government’s rights in the inventions.
♦ NIH: This means an obligation to assign title to
  federally supported inventions to the Recipient.
♦ FAR 52.227-11(e)(2); 37 CFR 401.14(F)(2);

                          72
A Cautionary Tale: Stanford v. Roche
Molecular Sys., 131 S.Ct. 2188 (2011)

♦ The facts in Stanford
  – Stanford researcher Mark Holodniy invented a
    procedure for calculating the amount of HIV in
    a patient’s blood, which was funded, in part, by
    a NIH grant
  – Holodniy worked on the invention at Stanford
    and at the lab of a private company, Cetus
    (predecessor to Roche)


                          73
Facts in Stanford Case

♦ Stanford disclosed the invention to NIH,
  pursuant to the Bayh-Dole provisions in the
  grant. It elected to retain title, and prosecuted
  and obtained patents for the invention.
♦ Roche began manufacturing AIDS test kits
  and Stanford sued for infringement.




                        74
♦ Problem – Holodniy agreed with both Stanford and Cetus
  to assign his right to the invention.
♦ Stanford Copyright and Patent Agreement: “I agree to
  assign . . . to Stanford . . . that right, title and interest in
  and to . . . such inventions as required by Contracts and
  Grants”.
♦ Cetus Visitor’s Confidentiality Agreement: “I will assign
  and do hereby assign to CETUS my right, title and
  interest” in inventions conceived “as a consequence of my
  access to CETUS’ facilities or information”.


                               75
♦ Before case got to Supreme Court, Federal
  Circuit found that the Cetus assignment, even
  though it came later, trumped the Stanford
  assignment.
♦ Supreme Court does not challenge holding
  that Cetus, and not Stanford, as a matter of
  contract, held rights in the invention.



                      76
♦ Supreme Court asks to examine whether
  Bayh-Dole vests title to federally-funded
  inventions in the federal contractor or the
  Government, if the contractor fails to obtain an
  assignment of rights from inventor employee.
♦ Court says NO.




                        77
♦ Citing basic precepts of patent law, the Court
  finds that inventor, Holodniy, owned and had
  exclusive rights to the patent, which he was
  free to convey by contract to his employer or a
  third party.
♦ Court finds that Stanford’s right to “retain title”
  (and by implication the Government’s reverter
  rights) did not apply to inventions which had
  not been properly assigned by the employee.

                         78
♦ Court finds that Bayh-Dole invention allocation
  scheme only applies to “subject inventions” --
  a term defined in statute, FAR and CFR as an
  “invention of the contractor”. Court finds that
  under U.S. Patent Law a contractor entity has
  no rights unless those are assigned by actual
  individual inventor.
♦ Government and contractor get no rights in
  inventions conceived with federal funds unless
  the employee assign the rights.
                       79
♦ Court finds that the Government does get title
  without an assignment under DOE, NASA and
  NRC statutes. Court found that exclusive
  grant of title in the statute “expressly deprived
  [inventors] of their interest.”




                        80
♦ STRANGE RESULT: Government gets clear
  and exclusive title to inventions developed
  under DOE, NASA and NRC funding
  agreements with large for-profit businesses.
♦ There is no opportunity for Government or
  contractor to get title in DOE, NASA and NRC
  funding agreements with nonprofits or small
  businesses unless the employee inventor
  assigns his rights to the contractor or grantee.

                        81
♦ Take-Away for Contracting Officers and
  Companies
  – Ensure that all employees have properly
    assigned right to inventions to contractor
  – Require employees to disclose prior
    assignments and closely scrutinize any
    agreements with third parties
  – Carry due diligence down to subcontractors
    and suppliers

                       82
Special Rule for Non-Profits

♦ No Assignments in the United States without Approval
  of the Agency (except orgs with primary function of
  managing inventions).
♦ Must Share Royalties with Inventor, including Federal
  Employee Co-Inventor.
♦ AIA as of 9/16/12: Not required but should give
  preference to small business firms as licensees
  provided they are “equally as likely to bring the
  invention to practical application” as large businesses.
♦ FAR 52.227-11(i); 37 CFR 401.14(k).


                            83
Patent Usage on a Government Contract

♦ A patent holder’s sole remedy for Government
  use of a patent or use by someone acting for
  the Government is suit against the
  Government in the Court of Federal Claims.
28 U.S.C. § 1498




                      84
Patent Usage on a Government Contract

♦ Not considered infringement.
♦ No injunctions, treble damages, court costs, or
  attorney fees.
♦ Government may continue usage of the
  invention.
♦ Government only liable for “reasonable and
  entire compensation,” i.e., a fair licensing fee.



                        85
Patent Usage on a Government Contract

♦ Generally contractors protected from
  infringement claims if use authorized
  – FAR 52.227-1, Authorization and Consent
♦ Express authorization by Government not
  always required to protect contractors from
  infringement claims
  – Authorization may be implied, e.g., the contract
    requires the contractor to use the infringing
    method

                        86
Patent Usage on a Government Contract

♦ Indenmification
  – The Government can require that the
    contractor indemnify it for infringement (FAR
    52.227-3)
  – This clause is generally included in contracts
    for commercial items but excluded from
    research and development contracts




                        87
QUESTIONS?



    Daniel J. Kelly
McCarter & English, LLP
   265 Franklin St.
  Boston, MA 02110
    617-449-6526
 dkelly@mccarter.com


          88

Contenu connexe

Tendances

Patent 101: Protecting Innovations
Patent 101: Protecting InnovationsPatent 101: Protecting Innovations
Patent 101: Protecting InnovationsMintz Levin
 
Protecting the Inventions of Start-ups
Protecting the Inventions of Start-upsProtecting the Inventions of Start-ups
Protecting the Inventions of Start-upsGary M. Myles, Ph.D.
 
Dr. Ravi Dhar & Nikhil Dhar on Intellectual Property. Part I- Understanding P...
Dr. Ravi Dhar & Nikhil Dhar on Intellectual Property. Part I- Understanding P...Dr. Ravi Dhar & Nikhil Dhar on Intellectual Property. Part I- Understanding P...
Dr. Ravi Dhar & Nikhil Dhar on Intellectual Property. Part I- Understanding P...Dr. Ravi Dhar
 
Wipo smes sin_07_3_a
Wipo smes sin_07_3_aWipo smes sin_07_3_a
Wipo smes sin_07_3_aarash1234
 
Inventing 101- Protecting the rights to your invention
Inventing 101- Protecting the rights to your inventionInventing 101- Protecting the rights to your invention
Inventing 101- Protecting the rights to your inventionHovey Williams LLP
 
Intellectual Property Considerations for Researchers
Intellectual Property Considerations for ResearchersIntellectual Property Considerations for Researchers
Intellectual Property Considerations for ResearchersEugenio Torres
 
What are they & what do they protect? How to apply for & get a granted pate...
  What are they & what do they protect? How to apply for & get a granted pate...  What are they & what do they protect? How to apply for & get a granted pate...
What are they & what do they protect? How to apply for & get a granted pate...obrreview
 
Food for Thought – The Potential for Food Patenting
Food for Thought – The Potential for Food PatentingFood for Thought – The Potential for Food Patenting
Food for Thought – The Potential for Food PatentingKirby Drake
 
Patents 101 and Patent Prosecution Overview and Costs
Patents 101 and Patent Prosecution Overview and CostsPatents 101 and Patent Prosecution Overview and Costs
Patents 101 and Patent Prosecution Overview and CostsLarry Baratta
 
Become Patent-smart Entrepreneur
Become Patent-smart EntrepreneurBecome Patent-smart Entrepreneur
Become Patent-smart Entrepreneurhemantchaskar
 
Patentability Search- Importance and How to Do Patentability Search
Patentability Search- Importance and How to Do Patentability SearchPatentability Search- Importance and How to Do Patentability Search
Patentability Search- Importance and How to Do Patentability SearchTT Consultants
 
Preparing Your Portfolio for Prime Time: IP Due Diligence
Preparing Your Portfolio for Prime Time: IP Due DiligencePreparing Your Portfolio for Prime Time: IP Due Diligence
Preparing Your Portfolio for Prime Time: IP Due DiligenceMintz Levin
 
SKGF_Advisory_Two Questions Every Wind Energy Company Should Ask Itself_2009
SKGF_Advisory_Two Questions Every Wind Energy Company Should Ask Itself_2009SKGF_Advisory_Two Questions Every Wind Energy Company Should Ask Itself_2009
SKGF_Advisory_Two Questions Every Wind Energy Company Should Ask Itself_2009SterneKessler
 
Patent Law in 2014: Act fast or get left behind
Patent Law in 2014: Act fast or get left behindPatent Law in 2014: Act fast or get left behind
Patent Law in 2014: Act fast or get left behindsteve_ritchey
 
Patent prior art search and trademark search
Patent prior art search and trademark searchPatent prior art search and trademark search
Patent prior art search and trademark searchvakilsearch_tutorial
 
Prior Art Search - An Overview
Prior Art Search - An OverviewPrior Art Search - An Overview
Prior Art Search - An OverviewManoj Prajapati
 
novelty and patentability of innovations_utility requirement for innovation p...
novelty and patentability of innovations_utility requirement for innovation p...novelty and patentability of innovations_utility requirement for innovation p...
novelty and patentability of innovations_utility requirement for innovation p...welcometofacebook
 
Intellectual Property: Legal Bootcamp, December 2013
Intellectual Property: Legal Bootcamp, December 2013Intellectual Property: Legal Bootcamp, December 2013
Intellectual Property: Legal Bootcamp, December 2013This account is closed
 

Tendances (20)

Patenting Inventions
Patenting InventionsPatenting Inventions
Patenting Inventions
 
Patent 101: Protecting Innovations
Patent 101: Protecting InnovationsPatent 101: Protecting Innovations
Patent 101: Protecting Innovations
 
Protecting the Inventions of Start-ups
Protecting the Inventions of Start-upsProtecting the Inventions of Start-ups
Protecting the Inventions of Start-ups
 
Dr. Ravi Dhar & Nikhil Dhar on Intellectual Property. Part I- Understanding P...
Dr. Ravi Dhar & Nikhil Dhar on Intellectual Property. Part I- Understanding P...Dr. Ravi Dhar & Nikhil Dhar on Intellectual Property. Part I- Understanding P...
Dr. Ravi Dhar & Nikhil Dhar on Intellectual Property. Part I- Understanding P...
 
Wipo smes sin_07_3_a
Wipo smes sin_07_3_aWipo smes sin_07_3_a
Wipo smes sin_07_3_a
 
Inventing 101- Protecting the rights to your invention
Inventing 101- Protecting the rights to your inventionInventing 101- Protecting the rights to your invention
Inventing 101- Protecting the rights to your invention
 
Intellectual Property Considerations for Researchers
Intellectual Property Considerations for ResearchersIntellectual Property Considerations for Researchers
Intellectual Property Considerations for Researchers
 
What are they & what do they protect? How to apply for & get a granted pate...
  What are they & what do they protect? How to apply for & get a granted pate...  What are they & what do they protect? How to apply for & get a granted pate...
What are they & what do they protect? How to apply for & get a granted pate...
 
Food for Thought – The Potential for Food Patenting
Food for Thought – The Potential for Food PatentingFood for Thought – The Potential for Food Patenting
Food for Thought – The Potential for Food Patenting
 
Patents 101 and Patent Prosecution Overview and Costs
Patents 101 and Patent Prosecution Overview and CostsPatents 101 and Patent Prosecution Overview and Costs
Patents 101 and Patent Prosecution Overview and Costs
 
Become Patent-smart Entrepreneur
Become Patent-smart EntrepreneurBecome Patent-smart Entrepreneur
Become Patent-smart Entrepreneur
 
Patentability Search- Importance and How to Do Patentability Search
Patentability Search- Importance and How to Do Patentability SearchPatentability Search- Importance and How to Do Patentability Search
Patentability Search- Importance and How to Do Patentability Search
 
Preparing Your Portfolio for Prime Time: IP Due Diligence
Preparing Your Portfolio for Prime Time: IP Due DiligencePreparing Your Portfolio for Prime Time: IP Due Diligence
Preparing Your Portfolio for Prime Time: IP Due Diligence
 
SKGF_Advisory_Two Questions Every Wind Energy Company Should Ask Itself_2009
SKGF_Advisory_Two Questions Every Wind Energy Company Should Ask Itself_2009SKGF_Advisory_Two Questions Every Wind Energy Company Should Ask Itself_2009
SKGF_Advisory_Two Questions Every Wind Energy Company Should Ask Itself_2009
 
Patent search
Patent searchPatent search
Patent search
 
Patent Law in 2014: Act fast or get left behind
Patent Law in 2014: Act fast or get left behindPatent Law in 2014: Act fast or get left behind
Patent Law in 2014: Act fast or get left behind
 
Patent prior art search and trademark search
Patent prior art search and trademark searchPatent prior art search and trademark search
Patent prior art search and trademark search
 
Prior Art Search - An Overview
Prior Art Search - An OverviewPrior Art Search - An Overview
Prior Art Search - An Overview
 
novelty and patentability of innovations_utility requirement for innovation p...
novelty and patentability of innovations_utility requirement for innovation p...novelty and patentability of innovations_utility requirement for innovation p...
novelty and patentability of innovations_utility requirement for innovation p...
 
Intellectual Property: Legal Bootcamp, December 2013
Intellectual Property: Legal Bootcamp, December 2013Intellectual Property: Legal Bootcamp, December 2013
Intellectual Property: Legal Bootcamp, December 2013
 

Similaire à Patent Basics for Emerging Companies

MaRS Best Practices: IP Best Practices for Life Sciences Companies - Victoria...
MaRS Best Practices: IP Best Practices for Life Sciences Companies - Victoria...MaRS Best Practices: IP Best Practices for Life Sciences Companies - Victoria...
MaRS Best Practices: IP Best Practices for Life Sciences Companies - Victoria...MaRS Discovery District
 
Patent M.pharm Pharmaceutic$ industry pharmacy
Patent M.pharm Pharmaceutic$ industry pharmacy Patent M.pharm Pharmaceutic$ industry pharmacy
Patent M.pharm Pharmaceutic$ industry pharmacy Abdallah Abdalmalk
 
MaRS Best Practices: IP Best Practices for Life Sciences Companies - Victoria...
MaRS Best Practices: IP Best Practices for Life Sciences Companies - Victoria...MaRS Best Practices: IP Best Practices for Life Sciences Companies - Victoria...
MaRS Best Practices: IP Best Practices for Life Sciences Companies - Victoria...MaRS Discovery District
 
intellectualpropertypresentation_872607.ppt
intellectualpropertypresentation_872607.pptintellectualpropertypresentation_872607.ppt
intellectualpropertypresentation_872607.pptMalathi327745
 
intellectualpropertypresentation_872607.ppt
intellectualpropertypresentation_872607.pptintellectualpropertypresentation_872607.ppt
intellectualpropertypresentation_872607.pptanandM654977
 
intellectual property presentation.ppt
intellectual property presentation.pptintellectual property presentation.ppt
intellectual property presentation.pptanixumt
 
Patentable and Non Patentable Inventions
Patentable and Non Patentable InventionsPatentable and Non Patentable Inventions
Patentable and Non Patentable Inventionsegoistic_ek
 
Patents and intellectual property patent disclosure.
Patents and intellectual property  patent disclosure.Patents and intellectual property  patent disclosure.
Patents and intellectual property patent disclosure.gidla vinay
 
IPR Basics - J Mayer 2012.pdf
IPR Basics - J Mayer 2012.pdfIPR Basics - J Mayer 2012.pdf
IPR Basics - J Mayer 2012.pdfMANALISHINDE25
 
Patents Basics
Patents BasicsPatents Basics
Patents BasicsPhysicsUtu
 
Patents and intellectual Property Rights
Patents and intellectual Property RightsPatents and intellectual Property Rights
Patents and intellectual Property RightsPatel Abdul Waheed
 
4-patents.pptx Intellectual property systems
4-patents.pptx Intellectual property systems4-patents.pptx Intellectual property systems
4-patents.pptx Intellectual property systemsSrikantKapoor1
 
SDR -Patents-1.......................pptx
SDR -Patents-1.......................pptxSDR -Patents-1.......................pptx
SDR -Patents-1.......................pptxVaibhavwagh48
 
Novelty search USA & Canada | Patentability Search | InventionIP
Novelty search USA & Canada | Patentability Search | InventionIPNovelty search USA & Canada | Patentability Search | InventionIP
Novelty search USA & Canada | Patentability Search | InventionIPInvention ip
 

Similaire à Patent Basics for Emerging Companies (20)

MaRS Best Practices: IP Best Practices for Life Sciences Companies - Victoria...
MaRS Best Practices: IP Best Practices for Life Sciences Companies - Victoria...MaRS Best Practices: IP Best Practices for Life Sciences Companies - Victoria...
MaRS Best Practices: IP Best Practices for Life Sciences Companies - Victoria...
 
Patent M.pharm Pharmaceutic$ industry pharmacy
Patent M.pharm Pharmaceutic$ industry pharmacy Patent M.pharm Pharmaceutic$ industry pharmacy
Patent M.pharm Pharmaceutic$ industry pharmacy
 
MaRS Best Practices: IP Best Practices for Life Sciences Companies - Victoria...
MaRS Best Practices: IP Best Practices for Life Sciences Companies - Victoria...MaRS Best Practices: IP Best Practices for Life Sciences Companies - Victoria...
MaRS Best Practices: IP Best Practices for Life Sciences Companies - Victoria...
 
Patents
Patents Patents
Patents
 
intellectualpropertypresentation_872607.ppt
intellectualpropertypresentation_872607.pptintellectualpropertypresentation_872607.ppt
intellectualpropertypresentation_872607.ppt
 
intellectualpropertypresentation_872607.ppt
intellectualpropertypresentation_872607.pptintellectualpropertypresentation_872607.ppt
intellectualpropertypresentation_872607.ppt
 
intellectual property presentation.ppt
intellectual property presentation.pptintellectual property presentation.ppt
intellectual property presentation.ppt
 
Patents krm
Patents krmPatents krm
Patents krm
 
Introduction to patents
Introduction to patentsIntroduction to patents
Introduction to patents
 
Patentable and Non Patentable Inventions
Patentable and Non Patentable InventionsPatentable and Non Patentable Inventions
Patentable and Non Patentable Inventions
 
Patents and intellectual property patent disclosure.
Patents and intellectual property  patent disclosure.Patents and intellectual property  patent disclosure.
Patents and intellectual property patent disclosure.
 
Info 442 chapt 5
Info 442 chapt 5Info 442 chapt 5
Info 442 chapt 5
 
IPR Basics - J Mayer 2012.pdf
IPR Basics - J Mayer 2012.pdfIPR Basics - J Mayer 2012.pdf
IPR Basics - J Mayer 2012.pdf
 
Patents Basics
Patents BasicsPatents Basics
Patents Basics
 
Patents and intellectual Property Rights
Patents and intellectual Property RightsPatents and intellectual Property Rights
Patents and intellectual Property Rights
 
PATENT PROCTECTION
PATENT PROCTECTIONPATENT PROCTECTION
PATENT PROCTECTION
 
4-patents.pptx Intellectual property systems
4-patents.pptx Intellectual property systems4-patents.pptx Intellectual property systems
4-patents.pptx Intellectual property systems
 
SDR -Patents-1.......................pptx
SDR -Patents-1.......................pptxSDR -Patents-1.......................pptx
SDR -Patents-1.......................pptx
 
Novelty search USA & Canada | Patentability Search | InventionIP
Novelty search USA & Canada | Patentability Search | InventionIPNovelty search USA & Canada | Patentability Search | InventionIP
Novelty search USA & Canada | Patentability Search | InventionIP
 
PATENT and types of patents
PATENT and types of patentsPATENT and types of patents
PATENT and types of patents
 

Patent Basics for Emerging Companies

  • 1. Patent Basics for Emerging Companies Maria Laccotripe Zacharakis, Ph.D. Thomas Hoover Daniel J. Kelly McCarter & English, LLP Cambridge Innovation Center March 20, 2013
  • 2. BOSTON // HARTFORD // NEW YORK // NEWARK // STAMFORD // PHILADELPHIA // WILMINGTON Introduction to Intellectual Property Maria Laccotripe Zacharakis, Ph.D. Thomas O. Hoover McCarter & English, LLP Cambridge Innovation Center March 20, 2013
  • 3. The Journey of a Patent
  • 5. Step 2 Document discovery in lab notebook 5
  • 6. Step 3 File Invention Disclosure Form with patent committee. 6
  • 7. Step 4 Patent Committee Discussion  Can invention be commercialized?  Search for prior art  Proceed with patent application 7
  • 8. Step 5 Preparation of Patent Application  Meet with patent attorney  Draft application  Review and edit application 8
  • 9. Step 6 File application with patent office 9
  • 10. Step 7 Review of application by patent examiner 10
  • 11. Step 8 Rebut the position of the examiner This process goes back and forth several times 11
  • 12. Step 9 Patent is granted 12
  • 13. What is Intellectual Property? ♦ Intellectual property is a blanket term covering areas of the law dealing with the protection of property which “springs from the mind.” 13
  • 14. Why is Intellectual Property Important? ♦ Product development makes it essential that the results of these efforts go as far and as long as possible ♦ Protection for protectable new products is essential – Without protection, new products may be reverse engineered or knocked off freely (i.e., doing research and development for competition) ♦ Patents are valuable – Licensing – Fundraising 14
  • 15. Types of Intellectual Property ♦ Patents – Disclose to the benefit of society in return for a exclusionary period of substantial duration ♦ Copyrights – Protect the expression of your ideas ♦ Trademarks – Protect your goodwill in the marketplace ♦ Trade Secrets – Keep commercially valuable information from your competitors (if you can do so effectively) 15
  • 16. What is a patent? ♦ A patent is a property right granted by the government which gives the patent holder the right to exclude others from making, selling or using the invention claimed in the patent. 16
  • 17. Types of patents ♦ Utility patents – Cover anything having an actual use – e.g. machines, processes, compositions of matter ♦ Design patents – Cover ornamental product designs ♦ Plant patents – For distinct and new varieties of plants that have been invented or discovered and asexually reproduced. 17
  • 18. Types of patents ♦ First Generation patents – Protect first generation products and platform technology ♦ Second Generation patents – Protect where you and your competitors will go once your product hits the market ♦ Others – Offensive patents – FDA Label patents, etc. 18
  • 19. Requirements for patentability ♦ Utility ♦ Novelty ♦ Non-obviousness/Inventive Step ♦ Written Description ♦ Enablement 19
  • 20. Requirements for patentability: Utility ♦ Invention must have some useful purpose 20
  • 21. Requirements for patentability: Novelty ♦ To obtain a patent, the invention cannot, before the date of invention/date of filing (AIA), be: – Patented – Known or used by others – Described in a publication  Some exceptions under the AIA 21
  • 22. Requirements for patentability: Non-obviousness/Inventive Step ♦ Invention must not have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to which the invention pertains ♦ Don’t rely on arguments, plan to obtain data demonstrating unexpected results over the art – It can be difficult to anticipate what an examiner will consider to be the closest art, so be prepared to run experiments to support patentability 22
  • 23. Requirements for patentability: Enablement/Written Description ♦ Enable any person skilled in the art to make and use the invention – Examples are the best defense against enablement issues ♦ The specification must… – Describe the claimed invention  No new matter can be added after filing  Problems typically arise when amending the claims 23
  • 24. Patentable Subject Matter ♦ Examples of subject matter appropriate for patenting include: – Drugs and Biologics (e.g., new compounds, prodrugs) – Formulations (e.g., new forms, carriers) – Delivery Vehicles (e.g., matrices, nanoparticles) – Medical Devices (e.g., catheters, bone screws) – Methods of Treatment (e.g., new regimens or profiles) – New Treatments (e.g., new uses for old drugs) – Diagnostics (e.g., urine tests) – New Designs (e.g., product or packaging design) 24
  • 25. What is an “Invention”? ♦ An invention exists when… – Conception is complete, and – The invention is reduced to practice  Both can happen at the same time 25
  • 26. What is an Invention: Conception ♦ Conception has been held to be complete only when the idea is so clearly defined in the inventor’s mind that only ordinary skill would be necessary to reduce the invention to practice, without extensive research or experimentation 26
  • 27. What is an Invention: Reduction to practice ♦ An invention has been reduced to practice when… – It has been built or practiced sufficiently to show that it would work as claimed, or – An enabling patent application has been filed 27
  • 28. Inventorship ♦ Only persons who contribute to the conception of the “claimed” invention may be named as inventors ♦ If a collaborator merely conducts experimentation dictated by another’s specific idea, he is not an inventor, even if the tasks he undertakes require skill and creative thought. 28
  • 29. Inventorship ♦ However, if a collaborator aids in developing the specific idea itself or through his experimentation significantly refines the original idea as to make it different from the originally conceived idea, he has added to the conception and should be named as an inventor 29
  • 30. Documenting the Invention ♦ Under the AIA, the US is no longer a “first to invent” system. However, still important to ♦ File invention disclosures ♦ Maintain a laboratory notebook… – Documents the inventive process – Serves as the source of experimental data for patent claims, patent examples, proof of concept, etc. 30
  • 31. Note Keeping: ♦ Recording conception – Clearly record facts surrounding invention ♦ Recording continuity – Clearly note any intervals in research ♦ Witnessing – Each page of lab notebook should be:  signed and dated information was recorded  signed and dated by a witness on the date information was recorded 31
  • 32. Note Keeping: ♦ Recording disclosures to others ♦ Speculation – Speculation regarding other embodiments of the invention, possible other uses, etc. should be recorded as this will assist in sizing up and fleshing out the invention (speculation could lead to other inventions) 32
  • 33. When to Patent ♦ The general rule is that one must file a patent application before an enabling, non-confidential disclosure is made or before a product is offered for sale – Printed publications, published patent applications – Disclosures to other companies, abstracts – On-line releases of information ♦ Accordingly, a disclosure to another party without a confidentiality agreement can constitute an enabling disclosure and may bar patent protection in many jurisdictions – Some jurisdictions have limited grace periods, but the circumstances are very narrow – don’t count on it 33
  • 34. When to Patent ♦ While the US has a limited grace period, don’t count on it – It does not prevent a rival patent filing – You can’t get you priority back in most jurisdictions, and possibly not even in the US, depending on what was disclosed ♦ Confidentiality/Material Transfer agreements are great, but only get you a breach of contract claim 34
  • 35. When to Patent ♦ Another area where there is a problem about enabling disclosure is talks at conferences – An oral presentation can be a bar in some countries – In addition, the dates of abstracts (which are often published or available on-line before the meeting) and poster session may be deemed a written disclosure ♦ Another problem area is grant proposals. Once funded, government organizations publish the abstracts, sometimes even if you tell them not to without additional review. 35
  • 36. Due Diligence: Checklist 36
  • 37. Due Diligence: Checklist ♦ I. Intellectual Property Portfolio – Scope and Status – Inventorship and Ownership – Formalities – Foreign Filing – Priority Contests/Derivation v. First to Invent & First to File – Other Related Applications in the Portfolio ♦ II. Actual or Threatened Adverse Proceedings Involving Third Parties ♦ III. Advice on Freedom to Operate ♦ IV. License or other Agreements with Third Parties ♦ V. Key Personnel ♦ VI. Data 37
  • 38. Due Diligence: Intellectual Property Portfolio ♦ Scope and Status – This includes…  a list of all the intellectual property that the target company owns, controls, or has access to that is within the scope of the proposed transaction  A list of any 3rd party intellectual property covering the target company.  Access to the complete file histories of all issued patents and pending patent applications owned, controlled, or licensed by the target 38
  • 39. Due Diligence: Intellectual Property Portfolio ♦ Inventorship and Ownership – Are you aware of…  Any individual who believes that he or she was incorrectly omitted from inventorship (consultants, outside contractors, etc.)  Any claim by a third party that believes it has a right of ownership in an application or patent  Any inventor who has an obligation to assign to a third party  Any funding arrangements which would give another party an interest in the target company’s portfolio 39
  • 40. Due Diligence: Intellectual Property Portfolio ♦ Formalities – Account for all documents establishing title- ownership/licensee rights for all the IP owned, controlled or licensed by the target company and establish whether or not…  These IP documents remain in good standing  All assignments were filed and recorded  All filing receipts are in order  Maintenance and other fees have been paid  All relevant applications are pending (i.e., not abandoned) 40
  • 41. Due Diligence: Intellectual Property Portfolio ♦ Foreign Filing – In what jurisdictions have steps been taken to preserve foreign patent rights? 41
  • 42. Due Diligence: Intellectual Property Portfolio ♦ Priority Contests – Are you aware of existing or potential priority contests involving the claims of the invention? – In order to assess the outcome of likely priority contests we need the following:  Evidence of dates of conception and reduction to practice of invention  Any evidence you have of other parties’ dates of conception and reduction to practice 42
  • 43. Due Diligence: Intellectual Property Portfolio ♦ Priority Contests, cont. – Questions to answer:  What can you tell us about the prior art with respect to the claims?  What can you tell us about any interferences past or presently pending?  What can you tell us about any European oppositions part or presently pending? Is validity of any of the claims at issue? 43
  • 44. Due Diligence: Intellectual Property Portfolio ♦ Priority Contests, cont. – Questions to answer:  What can you tell us about the prior art with respect to the claims?  What can you tell us about any interferences part or presently pending?  What can you tell us about any European oppositions part or presently pending? Is validity of any of the claims at issue? 44
  • 45. Due Diligence: Intellectual Property Portfolio ♦ Other Related Applications in the Portfolio – If any other applications have been filed which would support the claims, it should be demanded that these applications and their prosecution histories be viewed. – In order to assess the patentability of the invention, the following from other applications which disclose the invention are needed:  Priority documents  Prosecution files  All known prior art and copies of any prior art searches  Summaries of any new data which might be used to support the patentability of the claims 45
  • 46. Due Diligence: Actual / Threatened Adverse Proceedings ♦ Actual or Threatened Adverse Proceedings Involving Third Parties – The following information is required:  Information regarding any actual or threatened IP lawsuits affecting the patent portfolio  Information regarding the legal opinions by external legal counsel regarding the validity of any third party IP rights that might affect the patent portfolio  Information regarding the legal opinions by external or internal counsel regarding whether the activities of any third party infringe or would infringe on the subject matter of the patent portfolio. 46
  • 47. Due Diligence: Freedom to Operate ♦ Advice on Freedom to Operate – Provide information regarding…  Any potentially dominating patents and, if any, search results, legal opinions, memoranda, and/or presentations to senior management regarding the target company’s freedom to use/test/make their product within the patent portfolio.  Any trademark clearance searches or survey results 47
  • 48. Due Diligence: Freedom to Operate ♦ Advice on Freedom to Operate, cont. – Questions to be answered:  Have you been asked to provide a “freedom to use” opinion with respect to the practice of the target company’s product?  Have you formed an opinion on whether the practice of the target product would infringe a valid claim of a US patent – can you say why?  Have you ever sent a letter asserting infringement of a claim of the portfolio?  Are you aware of any related claims or a third party that would prevent practicing steps of the invention? 48
  • 49. Due Diligence: License/Other Agreements with Third Parties ♦ License or Other Agreements with Third Parties – Identify all the products in the program – if any products are not being considered for the deal, discuss the relationship of these products – Have any other third parties licensed and subsequently decided not to pursue this technology; explain why the program ended 49
  • 50. Due Diligence: License/Other Agreements with Third Parties ♦ License or Other Agreements with Third Parties, cont. – List licenses or other agreements related to the research, development, manufacture, use or sale of the product, including:  Exclusive and non-exclusive license agreements  Joint development agreements or joint venture agreements  Secrecy / confidentiality agreements  Manufacturing or supply or other service (e.g. testing) agreements  Consulting agreements  Sponsored research agreements  Material transfer agreements  Technical assistance agreements needed to provide for transfer of “know-how” as to a product that affects the collaboration  Distribution agreements 50
  • 51. Due Diligence: Key Personnel ♦ Key Personnel – Provide a list and contact information of all persons involved in the prosecution of the IP portfolio and/or R&D of the compounds within the portfolio with whom we can discuss the proposed transaction. – Provide documents that establish the obligations of key personnel, including the inventors. Indicate whether persons are currently or formerly retained by the target company. 51
  • 52. Due Diligence: Data ♦ Data – Provide the following:  information, including a list and summary description, of all data relating to completed or ongoing clinical trials, preclinical studies, toxicology profiles, and proposed future publications related to product or its use in any field.  Any documents and/or information related to the status and ownership of clinical trial data and materials identified above. – Have any clinical trials (or relevant IP) been funded by third parties, including grants (academic or government)? 52
  • 53. QUESTIONS? Maria Laccotripe Zacharakis, Ph.D. McCarter & English, LLP 617-449-6512 Mzacharakis@mccarter.com Thomas O. Hoover McCarter & English, LLP 617-449-6572 Thoover@mccarter.com 53
  • 54. PATENT RIGHTS UNDER GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS & GRANTS Daniel J. Kelly McCarter & English, LLP Cambridge Innovation Center March 20, 2013
  • 55. The Bayh-Dole Act – 35 U.S.C. Sections 200-212 ♦ Under Bayh-Dole, passed in 1980, small businesses and nonprofit entities (including universities and research institutions) given right to retain title to inventions developed under Government funding agreements. 55
  • 56. ♦ Bayh-Dole extended by 1983 Presidential Memorandum to large businesses and for- profit organizations not subject to DOE, NASA and NRC funding agreements. ♦ DOE, NASA and NRC are given title by statute to any inventions developed under funding agreements between large for-profit businesses and those agencies; patents issued to the United States. 56
  • 57. Applies to Government Contracts, Grants, and Cooperative Agreements ♦ A Contractor’s Patent Rights are Governed by Part 27 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (Title 48 of the CFR) and the Patent Rights Clause (52.227-11). ♦ A Grantee’s or Funding Recipient’s Patent Rights Are Governed by Title 37 of the Code of Federal Regulations and the Patent Rights clause (Section 401.14). 57
  • 58. Nature of Government’s Right ♦ Government gets a nonexclusive, irrevocable, paid-up license to practice or have practiced on its behalf such an invention throughout the world. 58
  • 59. Fund Recipient Must Act ♦ Under Bayh-Dole – title can revert to the Government if the grantee/contractor fails to disclose the invention, fails to elect to retain title or fails to file and prosecute a patent application within certain prescribed time periods. Failure to disclose means grantee/contractor loses all rights. Failure to elect title – grantee/contractor still gets license. 59
  • 60. Definitions ♦ “Invention” (FAR 27.301; 37 CFR 401.2(c)) – any invention or discovery that is or may be patentable or otherwise protectable under the Patent laws or any novel variety of plant that is or may be protectable under the Plant Variety Protection Act 60
  • 61. Definitions ♦ “Subject Invention” (FAR 27.301; 37 CFR 401.2(d)) – any invention of the contractor conceived or first actually reduced to practice in the performance of work under a government contract or funding arrangement 61
  • 62. Funding Recipient’s Right to Elect Title ♦ Narrow Exceptions to Recipient’s Right to Elect to Retain Title – Foreign companies – Exceptional circumstances in furtherance of policy objectives – National security – Contracts for government owned R&D or production facilities FAR 27.302(b)(1)-(4); 37 CFR 401.3(a) 62
  • 63. Government’s Rights if Recipient Elects Title ♦ Government License Rights – Minimum: Nonexclusive, nontransferable, irrevocable, paid-up license to practice, or have practiced for, or on behalf of, the U.S. Government throughout the world – May have additional rights to sublicense to any foreign government or international organization to effectuate treaties or international agreements – March-In Rights 63
  • 64. March-In Rights Where contractor acquires title, government can require contractor to license, or the government may license to others itself:  If Contractor has failed to take adequate steps for practical application  To alleviate health or safety concerns  To meet requirements for public use  To meet domestic production preference 35 U.S.C. 203; FAR 27.302(f); 37 CFR 401.6; 14(j) 64
  • 65. Failed to Take Adequate Steps ♦ Agencies Permitted to Request Utilization Reports (FAR 27.302; 37 CFR 401(h). ♦ NIH requires 12 month reporting on stage of development, date of first commercial sale or use, number and type of licenses, gross income, licensing to small business, status of U.S. manufacturing and identification of any FDA-approved product names. 65
  • 66. Preference for United States Industry ♦ A Recipient and Exclusive Assignee Must Agree that Products Embodying Subject Invention be Manufactured Substantially in the United States. ♦ Waiver is Permitted On Showing of Unsuccessful Attempts or Not Commercially Feasible. 66
  • 67. If Recipient Declines Title . . . ♦ Minimum License Rights to Recipient if Government Takes Title (FAR 27.301(i); 37 CFR 401.14(e) – Revocable, nonexclusive, royalty-free license – Extends to domestic subsidiaries and affiliates – Includes right to sublicense – Transferable only with agency approval – May be revoked or modified by the government to achieve expeditious practical application 67
  • 68. Procedural Requirements -- Diclosure ♦ Disclosure in writing (FAR 52.227-11(c); 37 CFR 401.14(a)(2)) – Within two months of disclosure by inventor to recipient’s personnel responsible for patent matters – Must identify investor, funding vehicle, sufficient technical detail and date of any public disclosure ♦ Implications of Failure to Disclose – Forfeiture of all rights – Potential liability for Government infringement 68
  • 69. Procedural Requirements – Election to Retain Title ♦ Recipient must elect in writing to retain title within 2 years of initial disclosure. FAR 52.227-11(c)(2); 37 CFR 14.401-14(c)(2). ♦ Exception for When 35 U.S.C. Section 102(b) 1 Year Statutory Bar Kicks In – Period for Election Can be Accelerated to No More Than 60 Days Prior to End of Statutory Period. ♦ Effective 3/16/13, AIA Changes Statutory Bar Conditions to On-Sale or Public Use Anywhere in World. 69
  • 70. Procedural Requirements – Filing the Patent Application ♦ Must File Provisional or Nonprovisional Application within 1 Year of Election (Nonprovisional must be within 10 months of provisional). ♦ If Statutory Bar Applies, Must File within Statutory Bar. ♦ Foreign filings within 10 months of first U.S. application . ♦ FAR 52.227-11(c)(3); 37 CFR 401.14(c)(3) 70
  • 71. Effect of AIA “First to File” Rule ♦ Effective March 16, 2013. ♦ As a Practical Matter Collapses Grace Periods Inherent in Bayh-Dole if Recipient Wants to Avoid Risk of Intervening Prior Art. 71
  • 72. Inventors and their Recipient Employers ♦ Recipient must obtain written agreement from its employees to disclose promptly to patent personnel subject inventions to comply with notice requirements. ♦ Recipient must require all inventors to execute papers necessary to file patent applications and establish the Government’s rights in the inventions. ♦ NIH: This means an obligation to assign title to federally supported inventions to the Recipient. ♦ FAR 52.227-11(e)(2); 37 CFR 401.14(F)(2); 72
  • 73. A Cautionary Tale: Stanford v. Roche Molecular Sys., 131 S.Ct. 2188 (2011) ♦ The facts in Stanford – Stanford researcher Mark Holodniy invented a procedure for calculating the amount of HIV in a patient’s blood, which was funded, in part, by a NIH grant – Holodniy worked on the invention at Stanford and at the lab of a private company, Cetus (predecessor to Roche) 73
  • 74. Facts in Stanford Case ♦ Stanford disclosed the invention to NIH, pursuant to the Bayh-Dole provisions in the grant. It elected to retain title, and prosecuted and obtained patents for the invention. ♦ Roche began manufacturing AIDS test kits and Stanford sued for infringement. 74
  • 75. ♦ Problem – Holodniy agreed with both Stanford and Cetus to assign his right to the invention. ♦ Stanford Copyright and Patent Agreement: “I agree to assign . . . to Stanford . . . that right, title and interest in and to . . . such inventions as required by Contracts and Grants”. ♦ Cetus Visitor’s Confidentiality Agreement: “I will assign and do hereby assign to CETUS my right, title and interest” in inventions conceived “as a consequence of my access to CETUS’ facilities or information”. 75
  • 76. ♦ Before case got to Supreme Court, Federal Circuit found that the Cetus assignment, even though it came later, trumped the Stanford assignment. ♦ Supreme Court does not challenge holding that Cetus, and not Stanford, as a matter of contract, held rights in the invention. 76
  • 77. ♦ Supreme Court asks to examine whether Bayh-Dole vests title to federally-funded inventions in the federal contractor or the Government, if the contractor fails to obtain an assignment of rights from inventor employee. ♦ Court says NO. 77
  • 78. ♦ Citing basic precepts of patent law, the Court finds that inventor, Holodniy, owned and had exclusive rights to the patent, which he was free to convey by contract to his employer or a third party. ♦ Court finds that Stanford’s right to “retain title” (and by implication the Government’s reverter rights) did not apply to inventions which had not been properly assigned by the employee. 78
  • 79. ♦ Court finds that Bayh-Dole invention allocation scheme only applies to “subject inventions” -- a term defined in statute, FAR and CFR as an “invention of the contractor”. Court finds that under U.S. Patent Law a contractor entity has no rights unless those are assigned by actual individual inventor. ♦ Government and contractor get no rights in inventions conceived with federal funds unless the employee assign the rights. 79
  • 80. ♦ Court finds that the Government does get title without an assignment under DOE, NASA and NRC statutes. Court found that exclusive grant of title in the statute “expressly deprived [inventors] of their interest.” 80
  • 81. ♦ STRANGE RESULT: Government gets clear and exclusive title to inventions developed under DOE, NASA and NRC funding agreements with large for-profit businesses. ♦ There is no opportunity for Government or contractor to get title in DOE, NASA and NRC funding agreements with nonprofits or small businesses unless the employee inventor assigns his rights to the contractor or grantee. 81
  • 82. ♦ Take-Away for Contracting Officers and Companies – Ensure that all employees have properly assigned right to inventions to contractor – Require employees to disclose prior assignments and closely scrutinize any agreements with third parties – Carry due diligence down to subcontractors and suppliers 82
  • 83. Special Rule for Non-Profits ♦ No Assignments in the United States without Approval of the Agency (except orgs with primary function of managing inventions). ♦ Must Share Royalties with Inventor, including Federal Employee Co-Inventor. ♦ AIA as of 9/16/12: Not required but should give preference to small business firms as licensees provided they are “equally as likely to bring the invention to practical application” as large businesses. ♦ FAR 52.227-11(i); 37 CFR 401.14(k). 83
  • 84. Patent Usage on a Government Contract ♦ A patent holder’s sole remedy for Government use of a patent or use by someone acting for the Government is suit against the Government in the Court of Federal Claims. 28 U.S.C. § 1498 84
  • 85. Patent Usage on a Government Contract ♦ Not considered infringement. ♦ No injunctions, treble damages, court costs, or attorney fees. ♦ Government may continue usage of the invention. ♦ Government only liable for “reasonable and entire compensation,” i.e., a fair licensing fee. 85
  • 86. Patent Usage on a Government Contract ♦ Generally contractors protected from infringement claims if use authorized – FAR 52.227-1, Authorization and Consent ♦ Express authorization by Government not always required to protect contractors from infringement claims – Authorization may be implied, e.g., the contract requires the contractor to use the infringing method 86
  • 87. Patent Usage on a Government Contract ♦ Indenmification – The Government can require that the contractor indemnify it for infringement (FAR 52.227-3) – This clause is generally included in contracts for commercial items but excluded from research and development contracts 87
  • 88. QUESTIONS? Daniel J. Kelly McCarter & English, LLP 265 Franklin St. Boston, MA 02110 617-449-6526 dkelly@mccarter.com 88