Source: http://www.postgrantproceedings.com/patent_modification/supplemental-examination/
Timestamp: 2018-04-19 13:13:58
Document Index: 741852511

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 257', '§ 505', '§ 335', '§ 337', '§ 1337', '§ 3', '§ 1', '§ 1', '§ 12']

Supplemental Examination - BSKB Post Grant Proceedings
Supplemental Examination is only filed by the patent owner, and covers any “information” (e.g., not limited to submitting prior art).1 Congress intended Supplemental Examination to remedy the “plague” that the “inequitable conduct” defense spawned.2 According to § 257(c), supplemental examination would prevent the patent from being held unenforceable (in a court proceeding) on the basis of conduct relating to information that had not been considered, was inadequately considered, or was incorrect, if submitted or corrected during Supplemental Examination. As explained below, there are several differences between filing a reissue application versus pursuing Supplemental Examination.
I. The Goal of Supplemental Examination
Under this new proceeding, information that was not considered, was inadequately considered, or was incorrect can be reviewed by the USPTO upon request by the patent owner. If any of the submitted information in the request raises a “substantial new question of patentability” (“SNQ”) the USPTO will issue a Supplemental Examination certificate ordering supplemental ex parte reexamination.
At the same time, a patent subjected to a Supplemental Examination cannot be held unenforceable on the basis of conduct relating to information that had not been considered, was inadequately considered, or was incorrect in a prior examination of the patent if the information was considered, reconsidered or corrected during a Supplemental Examination of the patent.3 What this means for the patent owner is that future accused infringers cannot assert an inequitable conduct defense concerning the information previously examined in a Supplemental Examination proceeding. However, this protection against an allegation of inequitable conduct is not without limitation; the protection does not apply where the item of information contained in the supplemental examination request is (1) already contained in an allegation pled with particularity in a civil action or is set forth in a notice received by the patent owner under § 505(j)(2)(B)(iv)(II) of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. § 335(j)(2)(B)(iv)(II));4 or (2) the basis of a defense in an action brought under § 337(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. § 1337(a)) unless the supplemental examination and any reexamination ordered are concluded prior to the date on which the action is brought.5
The AIA statute does not specifically define or specify what “information” must be included. Types of possible “info” may include: Office Action from co-pending or foreign application not yet considered; previously submitted incorrect arguments of a declaration; previously submitted incorrect interpretation of prior art; public sale before critical date not earlier disclosed; litigation papers; small entity status wrongly claimed; not submitting all experimental results; etc.
III. Requesting Supplemental Examination
A request for Supplemental Examination of a patent must be ﬁled by the patent owner. Each request for Supplemental Examination is limited to the presentation of ten items of information. Supplemental Examination addresses allegations of inequitable conduct during patent litigation, which allegations typically concern far fewer than ten items of information. In addition, if a limit of ten items of information is not sufﬁcient for a particular situation, more than one request for Supplemental Examination of the same patent may be ﬁled at any time. The request for Supplemental Examination must be accompanied by the fees for processing and ex parte reexamination ordered under 35 U.S.C. 257,6 as well as any applicable document size fees.
A cover sheet itemizing each component;
A summary of the relevant portions of any submitted document (including patent documents) that is over 50 pages in length (the summary should include citations to the particular pages of the relevant portions); and
A submission by the patent owner in compliance with 37 C.F.R. § 3.73(b) establishing the entirety of the ownership in the patent requested to be examined.
IV. “SNQ”
Within three months of the filing date, the USPTO will determine whether a SNQ exists. An SNQ exists when there is a substantial likelihood that a reasonable examiner would consider the item of information important in determining patentability. This is a relatively lower standard, and even lower than the prima facie case of unpatentability standard. In other words, it is possible that a SNQ is found, but the claims are confirmed as patentable/allowable since the prima facie standard was not met.
V. Supplemental Ex Parte Reexamination and Conclusion
The ex parte reexamination is ordered if an SNQ is found, and reexamination is identical to normal ex parte reexamination with several exceptions: (1) the patent owner will not have a right to file a statement pursuant to § 1.530; (2) reexamination of any aspect of the patent may be conducted on the basis of any item of information, not just patents and printed publications; (3) issues other than those raised by patents and printed publication s and subject matter deleted during an ex parte reexamination may be raised and resolved; and (4) information material to patentability will be defined by § 1.56(b) for the purposes of a Supplemental Examination proceeding, and any resulting ex parte reexamination.
A Supplemental Examination proceeding will conclude when the Supplemental Examination certificate is electronically issued. The certificate will indicate whether any of the items of information presented in the request raise an SNQ.
See Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, Pub. L. No. 112-29, § 12, 125 Stat. 284, 325 (2011).