Early Stage IP Strategies: The Long View Toward Strong Patents Moderator Steve Carlson (Principal, Fish & Richardson) Panelists Teresa Lavoie (Principal, Fish & Richardson) Gerald Suh (Chief Patent Counsel, Metabolex, Inc.) Vince Powers (Vice President, Intellectual Property, Cepheid)
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Early Stage IP Strategies: The Long View Toward Strong Patents
Moderator Steve Carlson (Principal, Fish & Richardson)
Panelists
Teresa Lavoie (Principal, Fish & Richardson) Gerald Suh (Chief Patent Counsel, Metabolex, Inc.)
Vince Powers (Vice President, Intellectual Property, Cepheid)
Ear
ly S
tage
IP S
trat
egie
s:
The
Lon
g V
iew
Tow
ard
Stro
ng P
aten
ts
•Mem
oria
lizin
g Yo
ur In
vent
ions
•Ow
ners
hip
•Por
tfol
io B
uild
ing
Mem
oria
lizin
g Yo
ur In
vent
ions
In re
Dem
bicz
ak, 1
75 F
.3d
994
(Fed
. Cir.
199
9)
McG
inle
y v.
Fra
nklin
Spo
rts,
Inc.
, 262
F.
3d 1
339
(Fed
. Cir.
200
1)
The
“ol
d da
ys”
of o
bvio
usne
ss:
Eve
n th
ese
pate
nts h
eld
up in
cou
rt
4
Obv
ious
ness
: Bac
k in
Pow
er
Just
ice
Ken
nedy
, A
utho
r of
KSR
v. T
elef
lex
(200
7)
Key
Fac
tors
For
Get
ting
And
Kee
ping
Pat
ents
:
•Sur
pris
e
•Une
xpec
ted
Res
ults
•Rec
ogni
tion
of a
Pro
blem
•Fai
lure
by
othe
rs
•Lon
g fe
lt bu
t unr
esol
ved
need
s
•Ske
ptic
ism
in th
e ar
t
•Tea
chin
g aw
ay
•The
inve
ntio
n’s c
omm
erci
al su
cces
s
•Cop
ying
by
com
petit
ors
•Cre
ativ
e cl
aim
ing
5
Telli
ng T
he In
vent
ion
Stor
y
§H
ow m
uch
com
men
tary
? §
Rec
ogni
zing
succ
ess
–G
ood
to b
eat o
bvio
usne
ss
§R
epor
ting
failu
res
–G
ood
to b
eat o
bvio
usne
ss…
–
But
may
be
bad
for e
nabl
emen
t,
writ
ten
desc
riptio
n, d
uty
to d
iscl
ose
§Es
tabl
ishi
ng c
once
ptio
n da
tes
§Id
entif
ying
inve
ntor
s
Mem
oria
lizin
g Y
our I
nven
tions
The
Bas
ics:
§
Pres
erve
not
eboo
ks
§D
on’t
alte
r ent
ries
§Ti
mel
y da
te a
nd c
ount
ersi
gn
§U
se b
ound
boo
ks
§W
rite
in in
k §
Avo
id b
lank
spac
es
§N
ew d
ay o
n ne
w p
age
Labo
rato
ry N
oteb
ook
Prac
tices
Win
ning
Stra
tegi
es:
§St
ate
the
prob
lem
to b
e so
lved
§
Rec
ord
surp
risin
g re
sults
§
Show
reco
gniti
on o
f inv
entio
n §
List
par
ticip
ants
Pi
tfalls
: §
Don
’t di
spar
age
the
inve
ntio
n §
Don
’t w
rite
abou
t pat
ents
§
Don
’t in
clud
e pr
ivile
ged
info
§
Don
’t in
clud
e ha
lf-ba
ked
thou
ghts
§
Don
’t w
rite
pers
onal
mat
ters
Ow
ners
hip:
Who
Ow
ns W
hat?
Your
Com
pany
Aca
dem
ic C
olla
bora
tors
Out
sour
ced
R&
D
Em
ploy
ees
§D
epar
ted
empl
oyee
s may
mak
e as
sign
men
t pro
blem
atic
§
Sale
of I
P as
sets
– c
loud
ed ti
tle?
§St
andi
ng in
litig
atio
n –
Res
erva
tions
of r
ight
, res
trict
ions
com
plic
ate
enfo
rcem
ent
–W
ho a
re th
e ne
cess
ary
parti
es to
ass
ert y
our p
aten
t?
–W
ho c
ontro
ls th
e ca
se?
–H
ow m
any
sets
of l
awye
rs?
§Pr
ior a
rt la
ndsc
ape:
–
You
r col
labo
rato
rs’ p
aten
ts m
ay b
e pr
ior a
rt to
you
r IP
§D
o yo
u re
ally
ow
n yo
ur p
aten
ts?
–Im
Clo
ne lo
st ri
ghts
to it
s pat
ent o
n Er
bitu
x to
aca
dem
ic re
sear
cher
s –
Yeda
v. I
mC
lone
, 443
F.S
upp.
2d 5
70 (S
DN
Y 2
006)
Ow
ners
hip:
Why
’s It
Mat
ter?
§G
et a
gree
men
ts in
pla
ce e
arly
on
–Em
ploy
men
t agr
eem
ents
, CD
As
–Fo
unde
rs, c
onsu
ltant
s, co
llabo
rato
rs?
§A
ssig
nmen
ts
–Sy
stem
s in
plac
e ex
tern
ally
and
inte
rnal
ly to
file
ASA
P
§D
epar
ting
empl
oyee
s –
Rem
inde
rs o
f obl
igat
ions
, exi
t int
ervi
ews
–N
oteb
ook
revi
ew, I
DFs
in p
lace
bef
ore
depa
rture
? §
Stre
amlin
e en
cum
bran
ces o
n IP
–
Cla
rify
enfo
rcem
ent s
trate
gy u
p fr
ont
Ow
ners
hip:
Pro
mot
ing
Cle
an T
itle
Portf
olio
Bui
ldin
g: T
imin
g of
App
licat
ions
E
mbo
dim
ents
C
laim
s
•Rac
e to
the
PTO
with
firs
t em
bodi
men
t?
•Will
you
r fir
st e
mbo
dim
ent s
uppo
rt m
eani
ngfu
lly b
road
cla
ims?
•C
arne
gie
Mel
lon
Uni
v. v.
Hof
fman
n-La
Roc
he, 5
41 F
.3d
1115
(Fed
. Cir.
200
8)
•Spe
nd m
ore
time
and
mon
ey d
evel
opin
g m
ore
embo
dim
ents
? •W
ill e
arly
“sp
ecie
s” a
pplic
atio
n be
pri
or a
rt a
gain
st la
ter
“gen
us”?
?
Portf
olio
Bui
ldin
g: C
oord
inat
ing
Team
s E
mbo
dim
ents
C
laim
s
Team
A
Team
B
•If T
eam
A a
nd T
eam
B h
ave
diff
eren
t mem
bers
, the
ir c
laim
s are
“to
ano
ther
” •I
f com
mon
ass
ignm
ent,
§ 10
3(c)
shie
lds T
eam
B fr
om o
bvio
usne
ss fr
om T
eam
A
•If T
eam
A c
laim
s “sp
ecie
s,” a
nd T
eam
B c
laim
s “ge
nus,”
ther
e m
ay b
e an
ticip
atio
n
§M
ap o
ut in
tern
al p
rior a
rt re
latio
nshi
ps
§W
hich
app
licat
ions
are
“by
ano
ther
”?
§W
hich
app
licat
ions
are
com
mon
ly
assi
gned
?
§Tr
ack
18 m
onth
clo
ck
–A
pplic
atio
ns p
ublis
h in
18
mon
ths
–Y
our p
endi
ng a
pps “
by a
noth
er”
will
be
prio
r art
agai
nst y
our o
ther
app
licat
ions
un
der S
ectio
n 10
2(e)
(1)
Portf
olio
Bui
ldin
g
Que
stio
ns?
Than
k Y
ou!
Related Documents
