Bonum Certa Men Certa

Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Defended by Technology Giants, by Small Companies, by US Congress and by Judges, So Why Does USPTO Make It Less Accessible?

It's not like the Patent Office desperately needs more money (there's excess)

United States Patent and Trademark Office
Reference: United States Patent and Trademark Office at Wikipedia



Summary: In spite of the popularity of PTAB and the growing need/demand for it, the US patent system is apparently determined to help it discriminate against poor petitioners (who probably need PTAB the most)

LAST week the US government dealt with a serious issue we had been writing about for a number of months. CCIA, as it turns out, submitted a letter to the House Judiciary Subcommittee On IP [sic] and yesterday wrote this post:



Yesterday, we submitted a letter for the record to the House Judiciary Committee Subcommittee On Courts, Intellectual Property and the Internet. This letter, written in response to testimony submitted for the Subcommittee’s hearing on Sovereign Immunity and IP, provides the details of our analysis of the patents which Josh Malone and Phil Johnson identified as showing a disagreement on validity between the PTAB and federal courts. In contrast to their allegation of 200 patents, the real figure is far lower. Of the 3,056 patents reviewed by the PTAB which were also at issue in litigation in federal district courts, there are 43 cases (just over 1%) in which the PTAB and a district court have disagreed with one another.

[...]

Conclusion



The data, when correctly understood, shows that the PTAB only rarely disagrees with the federal courts when both review the validity of the same patent. The data also shows that the two venues only rarely review the validity of the same patent. We believe the Subcommittee’s work will benefit from this understanding of the extreme infrequency with which the PTAB and a district court reach different conclusions.


Additionally, based on information that William New wrote about, "US Congress Members Signal Move To Block Allergan Patent Deal With Tribe" (Mohawk).

To quote the part which is not behind paywall:

Members of a US congressional subcommittee on intellectual property held a hearing last week that appeared aimed at finding ways to stop companies from “renting” the sovereignty of Native American tribes in order to avoid a process that can lead to the invalidation of patents. Elected officials called a deal between Allergan pharmaceutical company and a northeastern tribe a “sham” and a “mockery”, and signalled the start of the legislative procedure to prevent such deals.


Notice the use of the words “sham” and “mockery”. There's also "scam" -- a popular term in various blogs and comments. A Federal judge called it a “sham”.

One might expect the USPTO to heed the warning and make PTAB even stronger, but instead, based on this post from Patently-O and another one from New's publication, the USPTO reduces access to PTAB by means of fee hikes.

New wrote:

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) today issued changes to some patent fees, including increases in certain areas, including the cost of using the inter partes review process. Following feedback from users, the office went with some proposed increases, while keeping others at existing levels despite proposals to increase them, it said.


In the interests of patent quality, the USPTO ought to make PTAB even more affordable, not less accessible (more expensive). Here is the full press release:

USPTO Finalizes Revised Patent Fee Schedule

WASHINGTON – The U.S. Department of Commerce’s United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) today issued a final rule, “Setting and Adjusting Patent Fees during Fiscal Year 2017” to set or adjust certain patent fees, as authorized by the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA). The revised fee schedule is projected to recover the aggregate estimated cost of the USPTO’s patent operations, Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) operations, and administrative services. The additional fee collections will support the USPTO’s progress toward its strategic goals like pendency and backlog reduction, patent quality enhancements, technology modernization, staffing optimization, and financial sustainability.

In response to feedback from patent stakeholders, the USPTO altered several of the fee proposals presented in the Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM). The key differences between the NPRM and the final rule are:

  • In response to stakeholder concerns, the USPTO reduced both plant and design issue fees from the levels proposed in the NPRM. Still, the large entity plant issue fee increases to $800 (+$40) and the large entity design issue fee increases to $700 (+$140). Plant and design patents do not pay maintenance fees, and the majority of plant and design applicants are eligible for small and micro entity fee reductions, which remain available.
  • Stakeholder feedback suggested that increased appeal fees could discourage patent holders’ access to increasingly important USPTO appeal services. In response, the USPTO elected to maintain the existing Notice of Appeal fee at $800 instead of increasing it to $1,000 as proposed in the NPRM. Likewise, the fee for Forwarding an Appeal to the Board increases to $2,240 (+$240) instead of $2,500 as proposed in the NPRM. The revised fees still do not fully recover costs, but taken together should allow continued progress on reducing the backlog of ex parte appeals.  Since the 2013 patent fee rulemaking, ex parte appeal fees have enabled the PTAB to hire more judges and greatly reduce the appeals backlog, from nearly 27,000 in 2012 to just over 13,000 at the end of FY 2017. Additional appeals fee revenue will support further backlog and pendency reductions.
  • Increases to the PTAB AIA trial fees are aimed at better aligning these fees with the USPTO’s costs and aiding the PTAB to continue to meet required AIA deadlines. The Office’s costs for Inter Partes Review requests are consistently outpacing the fees collected for this service.  These fee adjustments seek to more closely align fees and costs. Trial fees and associated costs still remain significantly less than court proceedings for most stakeholders.
    • Inter Partes Review Request Fee – up to 20 Claims increases to $15,500 (+$6,500)
    • Inter Partes Review Post-Institution Fee – Up to 15 Claims increases to $15,000 (+$1,000)

Other fee changes proposed in the NPRM remain the same.

For the full list of the patent fees that are changing and more information on fee setting and adjusting at the USPTO, please visit http://www.uspto.gov/about-us/performance-and-planning/fee-setting-and-adjusting.





PTAB is important and the cost of petition matters, especially to small companies which are being targeted by trolls and have limited budget. PTAB defends them from patent trolls and software patents without having to go through courts and appeals, which can add up to hundreds of thousands if not over a million dollars in fees (no matter the outcome).

IAM says that according to Google's Suzanne Michel, "from [a] tech perspective IPRs have been very effective at reducing a lot of litigation" (direct quote from IAM but not Suzanne Michel). She is right.

United for Patent Reform‏ also quotes a report/opinion piece (HTIA’s John Thorne) which we mentioned a week ago: “PTAB and IPR have provided a relatively inexpensive & rapid way for @uspto to take a second & impartial look at the work of examiners & strike down patents that should have never issued in the first place...”

Hence our stubborn defense of PTAB.

Yesterday, IAM noted or highlighted yet another case of PTAB being used to thwart dubious patents, even if the petitioner is a large company (PTAB bashers like to obsess over such points).

The world’s largest oil and gas company Saudi Aramco has filed an inter partes review (IPR) against a Korean petrochemical business in what is a highly unusual move by one of the energy majors.

The Saudi national oil giant, which produces 12.5 million barrels per day, has brought the IPR against SK Innovation, which started life as the Korea Oil Company before morphing into a broad-based energy and chemicals business. The patent in question, number 9,023,979, relates to a method of preparing epoxide/CO2 polycarbonates and was issued in 2015.

It’s not clear what has prompted the review - there is no ongoing patent litigation between the two companies, which might mean that it is related to licensing negotiations that have broken down and Saudi Aramco has brought the IPR in order to gain some leverage in the talks.

[...]

Halliburton is among the most active of these, with 36 IPRs including 32 this year, mostly against its rival Schlumberger. Baker Hughes meanwhile has been involved in 27 IPRs either as petitioner or patent owner.


This should not be mistaken for the Supreme Court case regarding Oil States, but it certainly seems similar in certain aspects.

Recent Techrights' Posts

Jim Zemlin, Whose Wife is Said to Have Committed Securities Fraud at Bakkt, Weds Gates Foundation With Linux Foundation to Combat Fraud?
Remember who these people are enabling
From 91% to 33% or Less: How Microsoft Has Lost Australia
Historically Australia was quite a stronghold for Microsoft
Debian Developer at Sirius Was Under the Wrong Impression That Staff Must Check or Should See E-mail All the Time (24/7 Work Attention is an Occupational Health Hazard)
My personal and professional experience with a Debian Developer (DD) at work
Techrights More Productive Than Ever Before
Today we finally crossed the 1,900-page milestone
 
Links 05/03/2024: More Gaming Layoffs, Apple Trouble in EU
Links for the day
Gemini Links 05/03/2024: Financial Breakdown and Freedom of Protocols Initiative
Links for the day
Navalny is Dead, This Week We Might Know if the US Will Kill Assange
Olaf Scholz backs Julian Assange’s battle to avoid US extradition
What Quality and Equality Mean
racial lines
Over at Tux Machines...
GNU/Linux news for the past day
IRC Proceedings: Monday, March 04, 2024
IRC logs for Monday, March 04, 2024
[Meme] Record EPO 'Productivity'
Patent applications granted
Job Groups 5 and 6 at the European Patent Office (EPO) Another Case of EPO Discrimination
an under-reported (or entirely not covered) backlash from last summer
[Meme] Microsoft Fan: "Microsoft is in a panic from the continued loss of its user base"
Published a couple of weeks ago
Android Has Reached New Highs in Mexico, According to Web-Derived Data (Android Now Almost a Majority of the "Market")
Not far from 50%, i.e. half of the "market"
In defence of Albanian women: Outreachy & Debian favoritism scandal
Reprinted with permission from Daniel Pocock
Links 04/03/2024: Old Crisis Looming, UPC Already in Infringement of Article 6 ECHR
Links for the day
The Right to Disconnect (Meme and Very Recent References)
relatively new press
Links 04/03/2024: Techno-Babble in Tech Job Ads and Vision Pro Already Breaking Apart
Links for the day
Europe's Adoption of GNU/Linux, by Country (Now About 6%)
in Switzerland, for instance, adoption of GNU/Linux has been profoundly low
[Meme] 'Debating' People by Subscribing Them to Lots of SPAM
Rebuttal? No, spam.
From Sexual Harassment of Women to Yet More Cybercrimes
They can be prosecuted
Not Only Has Adoption of Windows Vista 11 Flatlined/Plateaued, Now It is Going Down!
Did many people delete Vista 11 and install GNU/Linux instead?
Over at Tux Machines...
GNU/Linux news for the past day
IRC Proceedings: Sunday, March 03, 2024
IRC logs for Sunday, March 03, 2024
Venezuela: Windows Below 70% (Laptops and Desktops), GNU/Linux Up to 7%
It's a lot higher in Cuba
ICYMI: ZDNet Financially Controlled by Microsoft
a history of censoring SJVN's Microsoft-critical articles
Argentina Joining the 4% 'Club' (GNU/Linux on Desktops and Laptops)
Data as ODF
Transparency Sets Society Free
"Convenient delusions" aren't bliss but temporary relief
[Meme] The EPO, Europe's Second-Largest Institution, Which is Contracting With Belarus
Socialist EPO
The European Patent Office's (EPO) Illegal Ban on Mass Communication Gets in the Way of Democracy
The scientific process (patents apply to science) must allow scrutiny, both from within and from the outside
Links 03/03/2024: Depression in Hong Kong, Sex 'Apps' and STIs
Links for the day
Links Gemini 03/03/2024: NixOS and NextCloud, Back Into Ricing
Links for the day
The Debian family fallacy
Reprinted with permission from Daniel Pocock
GNU/Linux Peaking in Europe, Android Measured as Higher or More Prevalent Than Windows
Android topping Windows
For Every Action There's a Reaction
Gates lobbying Modi
Like in Africa, Android Takes Control, Raking in Almost All the 'Chips' in Asia
So Microsoft has no OS majority except in Japan and Russia (and tiny Armenia).
Links 03/03/2024: Goodbye, Navalny (Funeral Reports)
Links for the day
Gemini Links 03/03/2024: A Wild Devlog Appeared and GrapheneOS Ramble
Links for the day
Gemini at 3,800+
total number of known capsules at above 3.8k
Be a Navalny
We salute Mr. Navalny
Mozilla Firefox is Back in ~2% Territories, Jeopardising Its Status as Web Browser to Test/Target/Validate With
Some new stats
[Meme] Russian Standards of Law: The Executive Branch Decides Everything
the president's kangaroo court
Up Next: The Tricky Relationship Between the Administrative Tribunal of the ILO and the European Patent Organisation (EPO)
We've moved from presidents who run a republic by consent to corrupt, unqualified, dictatorial officials who bribe for the seat (buying the votes)
IRC Proceedings: Saturday, March 02, 2024
IRC logs for Saturday, March 02, 2024
Over at Tux Machines...
GNU/Linux news for the past day
Beware Imposter Sites of Techrights (Not Techrights.com or Techrights.org)
Only trust pages accessed through the domains controlled by us
Italy visa & residence permit: Albanian Outreachy, Wikimedia & Debian tighten control over woman
Reprinted with permission from Daniel Pocock