News

On February 23, 2021, AIPLA filed comments in response to the USPTO’s Notice regarding the National Strategy for Expanding American Innovation. AIPLA's comments include suggestions for the support of individuals, including the implementation of shared workspaces, hubs, and labs, workshops, internships, and promotion of meetings and clubs, among other ideas. Some of AIPLA's comments regarding lowering the barriers to innovation in underrepresented groups include adjusting internal culture and increasing representation in leadership. READ MORE

On February 22, 2021, AIPLA filed comments in response to the USPTO’s Sovereign Immunity Study: Notice and Request for Public Comment, 85 Fed. Reg. 70,589 (November 5, 2020) (Docket Number: PTO–T–2020–0043). With respect to patent and trademark infringement, AIPLA believes that the record of reported cases provides support for abrogation of state immunity. With respect to trademark infringement, however, there are critical differences between those cases and patent and copyright infringement actions. READ MORE

AIPLA provided feedback to the USPTO on the implementation of the Trademark Modernization Act (TMA). The feedback three aspects of the TMA: general comments, comments on flexible response times, and comments regarding ex parte expungement and ex parte reexamination proceedings. AIPLA continues to advocate for a shorter response period to Office Action refusals that include only ministerial or procedural objections. AIPLA also provided feedback on a number of subsections regarding ex parte expungement and ex parte reexamination proceedings.

On February 2, 2021, AIPLA filed comments in response to the USPTO’s Notice regarding the Article of Manufacture Requirement for Design Patents under 35 U.S.C. 171. AIPLA indicated its support for a change in the interpretation of eligibility guidelines for computer-generated images to accept other articles of manufacture associated with the underlying programmed computer, instead of requiring that the image appear on a display screen.

The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) appreciates the opportunity to comment on the Draft Implementation Rules of the Chinese Patent Law. Attached is a table listing our detailed comments, some of which are also summarized in the file download section.

AIPLA filed a response to the USPTO’s request for comments on proposed continuing legal education guidelines objecting to ongoing efforts by the USPTO to institute a de facto federal CLE requirement and reporting system, noting that the biennial registration requirements and reporting systems are unnecessary and may lead to an active practitioner fee. AIPLA also expressed concern that the proposal would eventually result in a mandatory CLE program requiring a costly infrastructure which would ultimately result in fees increases to support it. AIPLA expressed further concern that the rulemaking efforts may not have complied with rulemaking requirements.

On December 3, 2020 World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Director General Daren Tang announced the newly appointed Deputy Directors General and Assistant Directors General, including former AIPLA Executive Director Lisa K. Jorgenson who will serve as Deputy Director General, Patents and Technology Center. Ms. Jorgenson will assume her new duties beginning January 1, 2021. For more information about WIPO, please visit www.wipo.int

AIPLA filed a response to the USPTO’s October 20, 2020 request for comments on discretion to institute trials in inter partes review (IPR) and post grant review (PGR) proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). The USPTO’s request solicits input on whether rulemaking is necessary and the type of rules it should adopt, but does not propose any rules. ​

AIPLA’s brief supports reversal of the Federal Circuit’s decision and argues that Supreme Court precedent does not support such a rigid, factor-specific approach, instead favoring a flexible analysis to assess whether an officer is “principal” or “inferior.” The brief explains that, while the question is a close one, the totality of the circumstances under this flexible approach supports finding that APJs are inferior officers who are constitutionally appointed.

As General Counsel, Mr. Berdan will serve as the principal legal advisor to the Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the USPTO. Mr. Berdan will also supervise the Office of General Counsel and its three component offices: the Office of the Solicitor, the Office of General Law, and the Office of Enrollment and Discipline. Over the past 25 years, Mr. Berdan has served in a variety of important legal positions, most recently, as General Counsel and Compliance Officer of Gaming Arts. Mr. Berdan will begin his new role at the USPTO on Monday, November 16.

On October 9, The USPTO published a notice seeking public input on proposed guidelines regarding continuing legal education (CLE). As we noted in an earlier notice, the final rule published on August 3, 2020, will require beginning March 1, 2022, that registered patent practitioners and individuals granted limited recognition to practice before the USPTO in patent matters, biennially submit a mandatory registration statement.

On October 13, 2020, the Supreme Court agreed to decide whether the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, as created by the AIA, violates the Appointments Clause in Article II of the Constitution. The Court granted certiorari in three consolidated cases (United States v. Arthrex, Inc., et al. 19-1434; Smith & Nephew, Inc., et al. v. Arthrex, Inc., et al., 19-1452; and Arthrex, Inc., v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., et al., 19-1458), but limited its review to two specific questions

The USPTO published a Final Rule on August 3, 2020 in a Federal Register Notice, announcing fee changes that take effect October 2, 2020. The Final Rule includes an approximate 5-10% increase to most fees impacted by the rule, with some larger increases, notably in issue and maintenance fees, maintenance late fees, and PTAB fees. Four fees were discontinued.

AIPLA congratulates Shira Perlmutter on her appointment as the 14th Register of Copyrights. Her extensive experience in intellectual property law will be a tremendous benefit to the Office.

The US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit on September 9, 2020, held that two former Royal Truck & Trailer Sales & Service Inc. employees didn’t violate the anti-hacking Computer Fraud and Abuse Act by forwarding and misusing confidential company information because they had permission to access it.

The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on September 8, 2020, held that the musical “Jersey Boys” doesn’t infringe the copyright in a Four Seasons band member’s autobiography because any similarities between the works are based on historical facts.

The US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit on August 31, 2020, held that a beauty and personal care sales rep deceived a CVS Pharmacy distributor about her rights to use Carol’s Express as a trademark. Beauty Enters. v. Gregory, 2020 BL 328390, 7th Cir., No. 19-3491, 8/28/20.

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on August 21, 2020, held that the owner of an emissions trading-related patent can’t sue California for infringement a second time after his first suit was dismissed.

The US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit on August 20, 2020, held that the $280 million in punitive damages Tata Consultancy Services Ltd., an Indian multinational IT services company, owes electronic health record developer Epic Systems Corp. for stealing trade secrets is “constitutionally excessive.”

The US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia on August 19, 2020, held that prolific inventor Gilbert P. Hyatt hadn’t shown that the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) deliberately chooses not to process, examine, or issue patents for his “extraordinarily lengthy” applications.