PRG Spring 2012 Advanced Courses Magalog

PATENT RESOURCES GROUP
ADVANCED PATENT L AW COURSES
FOR
ESTABLISHED PATENT PRACTITIONERS
LY N 9 ! O 4 HT $2 NIG
R PE
PRGs Spring Hotel Hyatt Regency Coconut Point Resort & Spa Bonita Springs, FL March 25-31, 2012
The America Invents Act is turning the patent world upside down. PRG is prepared. Are you?
Choose from 14 great advanced patent law courses. See page 3
New one-day course focused solely on the implications for your practice of the America Invents Act! See page 4
Beautiful venue with many on-site activities. Great room rate!

See page 32 See page 32
All returning courses updated to reflect the impact of the America Invents Act!
THE ALMA MATER
OF
40,000 PATENT ATTORNEYS
AND
AGENTS.
Register now at www.patentresources.com
PRGs Spring 2012 Program Getting You Ready for the AIA
For over 40 years, Patent Resources Group has been the nations leading educator of patent professionals, providing attorneys, agents, engineers, and scientists from around the world with comprehensive courses and publications that set the industry standard for patent education.
: WHY SHOULD YOU JOIN US AND HUNDREDS OF YOUR PEERS IN FLORIDA IN MARCH? BECAUSE PRGS :
Will prepare you for the America Invents Act all of our returning courses have been updated as needed to reflect the impacts on you and your practice of the America Invents Act (AIA) of 2011, the most significant development in the patent world in a generation. We're also offering a special one-day course focusing solely on the AIA, at a special discounted price, that every practitioner needs to take. Well help you avoid the dangers that the AIA poses to practitioners in all areas of patent law. Provide an amazing value our tuition rates have remained unchanged since 2005 thats seven years with no price increases! And if you come to our programs every year, youre actually paying less for our Advanced Courses due to our Loyalty Program (see below). Go beyond the basics, showing how to apply the law to real-world intellectual property issues and to make calculated legal and business decisions. Give you practical insights that you can apply immediately when you get back to the office. Are an investment in your practice or your company, increasing both your ability to successfully prosecute patent law and the value you bring to your employer. Provide an unparalleled opportunity for networking and exchanging ideas with our faculty and your fellow attendees.
The bottom line for you and your organization is that in todays challenging environment, you cant afford not to invest in your future. And attending PRGs Spring 2012 Advanced Courses program is the safest investment you can make. Register soon spaces will fill quickly!
About PRGs Loyalty Program

atent Resources Group's Loyalty Program provides preferential pricing at our Advanced Courses Programs. If you were a paid attendee at any PRG course in 2011, you are automatically a loyalty member and will be entitled to special pricing when you attend any courses at our 2012 Advanced Courses Programs! And after being a paid attendee at any PRG course in 2012, youll automatically be eligible for Loyalty Program benefits in 2013.
2 www.patentresources.com
Hyatt Regency Coconut Point Resort & Spa

B O N I TA S P R I N G S , F L O R I D A M A R C H 2 5 - 3 1 , 2 0 1 2
Three-Day Courses: March 25-27 (Sun-Tues) Art & Science of Patent Searching -- Patentability, Validity & Infringment and Optional Patent Searching Workshop . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Faculty: Brian Thurmond and Jonathan Skovholt
Chemical Patent Practice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Faculty: Tom Irving, Paul Browning, Erik Puknys, Mark Sweet, and Jill MacAlpine Comprehensive PCT Practice: How to Master Its Challenges
Faculty: Carol Bidwell and T. David Reed
...................
10
Due Diligence Investigations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Faculty: Bryan Diner, Anthony Gutowski, and Andrew Holtman Federal Circuit Law (2010-2012) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Faculty: Gale Peterson, Jon Hokanson, Jason Fowler, and Sharon Israel Patent Damages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Faculty: Michael Elmer, William Cochran, and Christopher Benson
18
20
23
Pharma & Biotech Strategies for Patent Prosecution, Hatch-Waxman & Litigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Faculty: Janis Fraser, Mark Ellinger, Jonathan Singer, and Terry Mahn
One-Day Course: March 28, 2012 (Wed) America Invents Act: Monumental Changes, the Consequences and the Unanswered Questions GNEW COURSE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Faculty: Paul Gardner and John Tsavaris
Three-Day Courses: March 29-31, 2012 (Thurs-Sat) Crafting and Drafting Winning Patents
Faculty: Dale Lazar, William Jividen, and John Tsavaris
.........................................
14 courses are available for the Spring 2012 Advanced Courses Program.
12
Tuition for each three-day course is $2,195. Combined tuition for the Patent Searching Course and Workshop is $2,590. Tuition for the one-day course is $995. (but get a special rate of only $495 if you also take any threeday course!)
Designing Around Valid U.S. Patents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Faculty: Patrick Burns, John Pinkerton, Patricia Prior, and Robert Turner Drafting Patent License Agreements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Faculty: D. Patrick O'Reilly, Brian Kacedon, Ronald Bleeker and William Pratt Patent Infringement Litigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Faculty: Cole Fauver, Becky Thorson, and David Swenson
14
16
24
Post-Grant Patent Practice: Review, Reexamination, Reissue, and Supplemental Examination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

Faculty: Kevin Laurence and Matthew Phillips
Procuring and Enforcing Business Method and Other Software-Based Patents After Bilski and BMC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
Faculty: Stuart Hemphill, Aldo Noto, and Devan Padmanabhan
Please see page 35 for information about the rest of our 2012 program calendar
Please note that the faculty members listed for each course are subject to change prior to the actual course date.
www.patentresources.com 3
America Invents Act: Monumental Changes, the Consequences and the Unanswered Questions
Projected State Bar CLE Credit:
Course Faculty
6.0 Hours
Bonita Springs March 28, 2012 (Wed) Hyatt Regency Coconut Point Resort & Spa 8:15 a.m. 11:30 a.m. and 1:30 p.m. 4:45 p.m.
Paul Gardner, PRGs academic director, has over 45 years of experience in examining and prosecuting patent applications, litigating patents, and teaching patent law and Patent Office practice to thousands of attendees for PRG and the UCLA, University of Washington, and Seattle University law schools. John Tsavaris has been with Kenyon & Kenyon for 25 years, where he currently holds the titles of Director of Professional Development and Special Counsel. Dr. Tsavaris is an Adjunct Professor of Law at Fordham University School of Law and is on the Advisory Committee of the Fordham Intellectual Property Law Journal. He is also an Adjunct Professor of Law in the Graduate Intellectual Property Program at Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law.
Registration deadline: March 2, 2012 Register early! Spaces will fill quickly.
PAUL GARDNER
PATENT RESOURCES GROUP ALEXANDRIA, VA
JOHN TSAVARIS
KENYON & KENYON NEW YORK, NY
Why Should You Take This Course? The America Invents Act (AIA), which was signed into law on September 16, 2011, is the most significant development in the patent world in a generation. If you dont have a thorough understanding of how this legislation will affect your practice, then the risks to you, your firm or company, and your clients are great. This course will provide the understanding that you need to practice effectively under the new law, while also highlighting areas where unanswered questions remain.
Course Description s all of us in the patent profession know, the time has come for us to become intimately familiar with the extensive, complicated, unprecedented changes and additions to Title 35, some of which have already become effective, others of which will become effective on September 16, 2012, and the remainder of which will become effective on March 16, 2013. Not only do patent lawyers and agents have to master the new law, we must during a transition period that will last for many years to come remain acutely aware of the old law and be able to determine whether the old or new law applies under any given set of circumstances.
The content of this course and its accompanying materials (including a black line edition of Title 35 showing the removed language of the statute stricken-through and the added language underlined, and with a reprint of the House Judiciary Committee Report 112-98 summarizing the purposes, background and perceived reasons that stimulated the changes) were created in an effort to assist patent professionals in acquiring a more or less profound understanding of the new law, its consequences, and the important unanswered issues raised by the changes, many of which will not be definitively resolved until the Federal Circuit interprets the law many years from now.
The course will analyze the statutory changes, consequences and unresolved issues, including the following, most significant subjects: 1. The first inventor to file system, which takes effect on March 16, 2013, and replaces the first to invent system of the current law. The course lecture and materials consider in detail the provisions of completely rewritten Section 102 of Tiltle 35 U.S.C., which expands both geographically and temporally the universe of prior art that may render claims unpatentable
for lack of novelty or for obviousness under Section 103, and the applications and patents to which the new law applies. 2. The new Post Grant Review proceeding (so-called by the applicable new statute, Chapter 31, Sections 321-329) before the newly named Patent Trial and Appeal Board, (formerly the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences). This course considers in depth the requirements, limitations, potential risks and consequences of such a review, which may be initiated by any third party on or after
September 16, 2012, who desires to challenge the validity of any claims in a patent issued or reissued during the nine month period preceding initiation of the review, on the ground(s) of failure of the claims(s) to comply with the requirements of one or more of Sections 101, 102, 103 or 112 (with the exception of a best mode violation, discussed below). 3. A new Inter Partes Review proceeding before the Board under new and revised Sections 311-319, effective September 16, 2012, which will replace old inter partes reexamination. The new proceeding will permit a third party to seek cancellation of claims in any patent (no matter when filed or issued) for lack of novelty under Section 102 or obviousness under Section 103, but based only on prior patents or printed publications. 4. A revised inter partes reexamination proceeding, which became effective on September 16, 2011 (and will expire on September 16, 2012 in favor of Inter Partes Review of paragraph 3 above), revised by imposing a more stringent requirement for granting a request for reexamination. The new requirement is that the information presented in an inter partes reexamination request must provide a showing that there is a reasonable likelihood that the requester will prevail (not merely the prior substantial new question of patentability showing under the previous legal standard). 5. A new derivation proceeding under new Section 291 of the statute, a proceeding before the Board whereby a patent applicant may establish that the inventive entity named in an earlier-filed application published within a year prior to initiation of the proceeding was derived by the earlier filer from the inventive entity initiating the derivation proceeding. 6. Revised Section 301 of the statute which permits any person to submit not only prior art consisting of patents or printed
publications believed to have a bearing on the patentability of a particular patents claims, a limitation of the previous version of the statute, but also statements of the patent owner filed in a federal court or Office proceeding wherein the patent owner expressed a position on the scope of any claim of the particular patent, and also related documentation (e.g., court pleadings and/or evidence). Such written statement(s) and related documentation may be considered by the Office in any proceeding reviewing the patent, but only with respect to interpretation of the claim(s) involved. 7. New Section 257, which permits the owner of a patent to request supplemental examination of the patent by the Office to consider, reconsider, or correct information believed by the applicant to be relevant. Applying the substantial new question of patentability standard, the Office will decide whether to order reexamination based on the information submitted in support of the patent owners request. If reexamination is ordered, the Office will consider all of the information submitted, not just the patents, printed publications and newly-added written statements to which ex parte reexamination requests are otherwise limited under Chapter 30 of the statute, Sections 301-307. 8. A Transitional [8 years, beginning September 16, 2012] Program for Covered Business Method Patents, a post grant review proceeding before the Board (mentioned in paragraph 2 above), for challenging the validity of any covered business method patent for which the petitioner initiating the proceeding (or his/her privy) had been charged with infringement. (Covered patents are those claiming a method or corresponding apparatus for performing data processing...operations used in the practice...of a financial product or service other than in technological inventions. Sec. 18(d)(1) of Public Law 112-29.)
9. New best mode law, curiously retaining the best mode disclosure requirement in Section 112, Paragraph 1, but eliminating its violation as the basis for an invalidity or unenforceability (inequitable conduct) defense. Newly rewritten Section 282(a)(3)(A) of Title 35. 10. Prioritized Examination, a procedure for obtaining expedited examination of applications, subject to applicants compliance with certain stringent prerequisites and payment of significant fees, aimed at final disposition of the application with 12 months of the Offices granting of prioritized status. 11. Prior user rights pursuant to rewritten Section 273, under which a good faith, commercial use of a claimed invention more than one year before the effective filing date of a claimed invention (or the date the claimed invention was first disclosed under a limited one-year grace period provided in Section 102(b)) is a defense to infringement. 12. Certain other changes in the AIA of less substantive concern and/or less frequently encountered, will also be considered, albeit to a lesser extent, such as Added inventors oath or declaration provisions under rewritten Section 115 of Title 35, Unpatentability of tax strategies, Patent Office fees, including new micro entity fees, Preclusion from evidence of failure of an accused infringer to obtain advice of counsel, Defense to infringement based on prior commercial use, and Elimination of qui tam actions for false marking. G
lay a round of golf amid beautifully preserved natural surroundings on a world-class course designed by golf legend Raymond Floyd.
Art and Science of Patent Searching Patentability, Validity & Infringement

... And Optional Patent Searching Workshop
Course Faculty The faculty consists of patent searching and analysis leaders at Landon IP who have
15.0 Hours
Bonita Springs March 25-27, 2012 (Sun-Tues) Hyatt Regency Coconut Point Resort & Spa 8:15 a.m. - 11:30 a.m. and 1:30 pm. - 4:45 p.m. (Sun-Mon) 8:15 a.m. - 11:30 a.m. (Tues) Optional Workshop 1:30 p.m. - 4:45 p.m. (Tues)
expert search experience as attorneys, patent search instructors, and examiners with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO).
BRIAN THURMOND
JONATHAN SKOVHOLT
LANDON IP, INC. ALEXANDRIA, VIRGINIA
Course Description
Why Should You Take This Course? The Patent Searching course presents a systematic process for performing prior art searches with greater efficiency and precision. It is designed to benefit a broad audience, including novice searchers, seasoned patent practitioners, and search professionals. The course also provides unbiased, detailed information concerning the latest databases and tools of the trade. Expert tips from search professionals are provided to enable high-level patent research through proper scoping, structuring, and performance of the search. Patent practitioners will recognize that a robust understanding of the prior art is a vital part of the patent process, particularly in view of accelerated examination demands and the America Invents Act.
It provides direction for determining when a search is needed and what types and sources of information should be searched in the process. Patent searching is both an art and a science. Consequently, search capability improves with practice. But optimum practice requires a solid foundation for those who seek to conduct searches accurately and efficiently. The course teaches when, how, where and why to conduct a search and is appropriate for those who will conduct the search or commission it. Designed for patent attorneys and agents, inventors, paralegals and research managers, the course and its materials will be understood by anyone from the inexperienced to advanced practitioners. Unlike workshops that are taught by competing database providers, this global course is not tied to a particular search engine, a database product or a patent information service. Instead, the instructors teach skills that are applicable across databases, both proprietary and public, and without bias toward the features of a particular search engine. Unique among its many features, the course provides a comparison of the major patent search engines and teaches the strengths, weaknesses and benefits of the database providers who provide them.
his course comprehensively teaches how to conduct a professional patent search.
Comments from previous attendees: Well structured course. Good pace. Very useful tips and information. High relevance to my specific organization. I'm entirely new to this field. It was general enough, but detailed enough, for a beginner like myself. Highly competent instructors. The curriculum and text were designed and written by twelve practitioners: eight experienced patent information specialists and four former examiners with expertise in both English and foreign language searching. The
curriculum reflects the combined expertise of Landon IP, which is one of only two companies selected by the USPTO to conduct patent searches on its behalf with a view to reducing USPTO examiners' towering examination backlog. Upon completion of the course, the attendee will have learned: How to approach a search in a systematic, methodical and exhaustive way. How to properly scope the search before even beginning.
How to carefully search by classification, text query progression, and citations, knowing the benefits and pitfalls of each. Both the major differences and subtle nuances in conducting a patentability, validity or infringement patent search. Issues unique to searching within specific technical disciplines. Approaches to searching non-Englishlanguage patents and published applications. Approaches literature. to searching non-patent
Course materials The text for the course is Art & Science of Patent Searching Patentability, Validity & Infringement, edited by Matthew Rodgers, Long Nguyen and David Hunt. The thoroughness of the text will minimize the need for note-taking at the program.
Optional Patent Searching Workshop

A patent search engine user account is needed for the Workshop. Please contact PRG if you need assistance in obtaining one. This Workshop is an optional add-on to the Art and Science of Patent Searching course. It gives attendees the opportunity to practice hands-on patent searching alongside the course instructors. The faculty will work with the attendees to answer questions and provide guidance as they execute their searches in real time. The Workshop is structured to test each attendees retention of the concepts covered in the course as they put their training to use in several sample search projects. Attendees will be provided with multiple sample disclosures, encompassing a wide variety of technologies, on which they will base their search. The informal, lecture-free setting will allow each attendee to work independently, but in close proximity to an instructor. Attendees must bring their own laptop computers and will be provided with wireless Internet access in the classroom. Attendees are also asked to bring
their own search engine user accounts so that they will be able to practice using familiar search tools. The instructors will be able to provide assistance with any of the major patent search engines. The attendees will be guided through scoping the search, performing the search and analyzing their results. Answer keys will be provided at the end of the Workshop so that participants may gauge their progress and have a reference to use for additional practice following the class. Requirements and Prerequisites: Completion of the immediately preceding 2012 Art and Science of Patent Searching course Important: Wireless-enabled laptop computer (Internet Explorer or Firefox web browser, and Microsoft Office package recommended) Important: Patent search engine user account (in an attempt to focus on course concepts and high-level searching techniques, publicly available search engines cannot be solely relied upon for the lab portion of this course) Important: Unrestricted use of third-party wireless connection (please verify with your IT department that your security settings will allow access to the wireless hub necessary for the course). G
Approaches to reporting search results. Differences between the major patent search engines and important considerations in selecting an appropriate search tool. Ways to get high-level information from patent search results. The basics of several peripheral topics including the use of the USPTO search templates, searching for accelerated examination, and searching using industry standards.
oconut Point's elegant accommodations begin in the lobby, the perfect place to relax and unwind.
Chemical Patent Practice

Course Faculty
16.5 Hours
(Including 2.0 Hours Legal Ethics)
The faculty has over 100 years of collective experience across the complete spectrum of chemical practice.
Bonita Springs March 25-27, 2012 (Sun-Tues) Hyatt Regency Coconut Point Resort & Spa 8:15 a.m. 11:30 a.m. and 1:30 p.m. 4:15 p.m. (Sun-Tues)
TOM IRVING
PAUL BROWNING
ERIK PUKNYS
MARK SWEET
JILL MACALPINE
FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, GARRETT & DUNNER, LLP WASHINGTON, DC & PALO ALTO, CA
Course Description
T
Why Should You Take This Course? Are you well-versed on how chemical claims are constructed and construed? Well enough to avoid an overly narrow, often disastrous claim construction leading to a royalty-free transfer of patented technology to your competitor? Well enough not to trip up on obviousness over KSR? If youd like to answer these questions with a resounding yes then you should attend our highly-acclaimed, comprehensive Chemical Patent Practice course. Dont fail your clients or yourself in these tough economic times learn from the best.
his up-to-the-minute course teaches the chemical patent practitioner how to use fundamentally sound principles to prepare and prosecute a United States chemical patent application in a conservative way to enhance such possibilities as: obtaining broad claim construction for literal infringement purposes, particularly by avoiding "vile" language (i.e., lightning rods for noninfringement and 112, para. 2 invalidity) that is best described as patent profanity; utilizing the doctrine of equivalents to the extent that the doctrine still exists; surviving Festo; avoiding a best mode rejection from the examiner; destroying, not rebutting, a defective prima facie case of obviousness in our current postKSR world, including illustrations from several real U.S. patents prosecuted by a faculty member; obtaining the broadest possible claims by avoiding too many and unduly narrow limitations; obtaining claims that will be directly and literally infringed by competitors rather than by customers; proving literal infringement of claims in litigation; obtaining claims infringed by downstream infringers; preparing and prosecuting the application to avoid inequitable conduct in view of the Federal Circuit's en banc decision in Therasense and subsequent cases; and understanding the implications of the various provisions and effective dates of the America Invents Act (AIA), particularly as they relate to filing strategies in and around the rapidlyapproaching March 16, 2013 date when the first inventor to file provisions take effect.
For example, the rising tension within the Federal Circuit panels on post-Phillips claim construction and the increasing pressure to revisit the Cybor rule of de novo review of claim construction on appeal will bring important developments for practitioners in the very near future on what to expect for claim construction. For the practitioner, the takehome message remains to prosecute as if your
life depended on literal infringement and lay the groundwork in the specification (the single best guide to the meaning of a claim term) for a broad claim construction. This course, presented by an experienced faculty, each with a significant depth of experience, suggests many practical approaches with those objectives in mind. We discuss how to establish patentability
and validity under 103 in the post-KSR world, where knowledge and direction equate power. Case studies, involving real U.S. patents, will provide a framework for creative thinking on the law of prima facie obviousness. We will look closely at the guidelines for best mode disclosure from a substantive and ethical point of view, particularly in view of changes made in the AIA. In addition, we consider the Federal Circuit inequitable conduct decisions in the context of the en banc Therasense decision, many of which will be reviewed for the lessons they provide to both in-house and private practice lawyers. In fact, the inequitable conduct and best mode discussions provide the two hours of ethics that is otherwise sometimes hard to find, particularly on substantive topics related to your practice. The ethics discussion should be from 8:30 to 10:30 a.m. on the second day (as currently estimated). The last day will include a discussion of a hypothetical chemical patent problem that synthesizes and reinforces the teachings of the class. The enactment of the AIA does not wipe the patent law slate clean. Because of the way the various effective date provisions activate and apply, the old law will be relevant to practitioners until at least March 16, 2034! Thats right practitioners will have to be experts in both old and new laws for at least
another 22 years! The Chemical Patent Practice faculty has lectured on the new law extensively and has studied it intensively in conjunction with people who were instrumental in the drafting of the legislation. The faculty will bring all of that background to their presentations to you. And do not be misled into thinking that this course is applicable only to patent prosecutors. The principles taught will greatly help those involved with prelitigations, litigations, Orange Book listings, due diligences and analysis of third-party patents for validity, infringement, and enforceability issues. Comments from previous attendees: This is one of the best courses that I have ever taken. All of the instructors are excellent and provide very helpful practical tips regarding chemical patent practice. The material provided is excellent and a very good reference guide. Mark Cohen Scully, Scott, Murphy & Presser PC October 2009 attendee Good overview and reminders of good practice points. Great consolidation of information and tips based on recent case law. Very current. Heather Gorman Thomas, Kayden, Horstemeyer & Risley, LLP April 2010 attendee
Course Materials The definitive treatise, Chemical Patent Law, written and continually updated by the Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner faculty, with the invaluable assistance of editor Stacy D. Lewis, will be provided to attendees at the course. This treatise covers virtually every situation that can arise in the preparation and prosecution of a chemical patent application. It will remain on your desk and in continual use long after the course. The treatise underwent a complete overhaul in the aftermath of the enactment of the AIA to provide completely updated materials to the course attendees. Although the treatise is of great value, the faculty members have found that the best vehicle for teaching is the use of slides, which will be provided in book form to attendees on the first day of class. The slides book will contain ample room for note-taking and cross-referencing and, as such, will be a valuable addition to your daily kit of chemical patent practice tools. In fact, you can bring it if you want, but you wont need the course book during the lectures. G
he Estero Bay Aquatic Preserve is home to a huge variety of Florida's native plants and wildlife, waiting to be discovered.
Comprehensive PCT Practice: How to Master Its Challenges

Course Faculty The two faculty members have extensive government and corporate experience in all
15.0 Hours
aspects of PCT matters.
Bonita Springs, FL March 25-27, 2012 (Sun-Tues) Hyatt Regency Coconut Point Resort & Spa 8:15 a.m. 11:30 a.m. and 1:30 p.m. 4:45 p.m. (Sun-Mon) 8:15 a.m. 11:30 a.m. (Tues)
CAROL BIDWELL
CONSULTANT ON PCT MATTERS FOR THE WORLD INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ORGANIZATION; FORMER SUPERVISOR OF THE USPTO OFFICE OF PCT LEGAL ADMINISTRATION
T. DAVID REED
CONSULTANT ON INTERNATIONAL PATENT PRACTICE SPECIALIZING IN PCT; FORMER SENIOR PATENT ADVISOR, GLOBAL PATENT SERVICES, THE PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY, CINCINNATI, OHIO
Course Description ince coming into force in 1978, the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) has established itself as a valuable way for applicants to obtain patent protection in many countries around the world. The number of PCT Contracting States is currently 144 and growing. PCT members include the vast majority of industrialized, developing and emerging countries of the world. The Comprehensive PCT course guides the attendees chronologically through the international phase of the PCT and into the national phase before the national and regional patent Offices of interest. The instructors present strategies for effective use of the PCT, the benefits obtained and options available when using the PCT. In addition, the course covers the numerous safeguards available for applicants, including the restoration of priority rights and incorporation by reference.
Why Should You Take This Course? Attendees will learn the benefits and advantages of the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) procedure as well as the numerous options and safeguards available for applications filed under the PCT. The Comprehensive PCT course enumerates procedures and strategies designed to obtain patent protection for inventions in multiple countries through the filing of a single international application under the Patent Cooperation Treaty. While a basic working knowledge of the PCT is useful when taking this course, it will prove valuable to both new and experienced users of the PCT.
The PCT allows applicants to secure a filing date in all PCT Contracting States by filing a single application in their home country and in their home language. The PCT provides a comprehensive search of the prior art and a preliminary, nonbinding written opinion on the novelty, inventive step (non-obviousness) and industrial applicability (utility) of the claimed invention. In addition, applicant has an additional 18 months beyond the end of the Paris Convention priority year to make final decisions on where to seek patent protection. The delay in the associated expenses of national filings alone make the PCT a costeffective procedure and can result in a significant cost saving by helping to avoid unnecessary filings and/or allowing filings in countries where commercial importance has grown between international filing and national phase entry. By filing an international application, all PCT Contracting States and four regional offices are automatically designated and are available for
national phase entry later in the process. Whether the international application is the first filing or it claims priority to an earlier filing, the applicant does not have to make the final decision on where to seek patent protection until 30 months from the earliest priority date. The final decisions are based on the information obtained in the international search report and the international preliminary report on patentability as well as information obtained by the applicant regarding the scientific status and commercial value of the invention. In short, through using the PCT, the applicant will have a much better idea of the likelihood of obtaining commercially meaningful patent protection for the claimed invention. In addition, the applicant will have the opportunity to obtain additional search results through the supplementary search option as well as have the opportunity to advance prosecution by using the optional international preliminary examination procedure. Applicant can amend the application and/or provide arguments for
consideration by the examiner prior to the issuance of the international preliminary report on patentability (Chapter II of the PCT). Depending on the International Search and Preliminary Examining Authorities selected by the applicant, certain national and regional patent Offices (including the US) allow a favorable PCT work product (for example, preliminary report on international patentability) to be applicants ticket to accelerated examination on their patent prosecution highway. This Comprehensive PCT course discusses: a) when the use of the PCT is advantageous and when it is not; b) the effects on patent term based on the first (priority) application; c) selection of international authorities under the PCT for greatest advantage; d) the information received by applicants during the PCT process;
e) entering the national phase; and f) upcoming changes in the PCT, and a host of other PCT-related topics. In addition, the course presents the growing information available from the WIPO Internet site via the PATENTSCOPE tool. The search Comprehensive PCT course includes a detailed look at patent-related provisions of the Paris Convention.
Course Materials A comprehensive text is used in the course presentation that includes detailed explanations of the various topics and sample forms. G
Comments from attendees of past PCT courses: Excellent instructors - thorough coverage of subject. The course materials are excellent. The lecturers have much experience in PCT-related activities and have the ability to explain that to a class. Outstanding speakers with practical experience.
he dedicated staff at the Stillwater Spa will escort you into private, luxurious salons where the skilled hands of a licensed specialist and the amazing scent of essential oils await you.
Crafting & Drafting Winning Patents

Course Faculty
15.0 Hours
(Including 1.0 Hour Legal Ethics)
Collectively, over 70 years of experience litigating, prosecuting and teaching about patents.
Bonita Springs, FL March 29-31, 2012 (Thurs-Sat) Hyatt Regency Coconut Point Resort & Spa 8:15 a.m. 11:30 a.m. and 1:30 p.m. 4:45 p.m. (Thurs-Fri) 8:15 a.m. 11:30 a.m. (Sat)
DALE LAZAR
DLA PIPER US LLP RESTON, VA
WILLIAM JIVIDEN
DINSMORE & SHOHL LLP, DAYTON, OH
JOHN TSAVARIS
KENYON & KENYON NEW YORK, NY
Course Description his Crafting & Drafting course marches to a special drummer and focuses on the end result producing a winning patent that will be held literally infringed and not invalid under 112, para. 1, despite the time pressure created by moving to a first-inventor-to-file system under the America Invents Act (AIA).
Why Should You Take This Course? Learn the areas of chaos in Federal Circuit jurisprudence of primary concern to practitioners who prepare and prosecute patents. The course will focus on a series of cases where the patent owner lost, not because of what the litigators did, but because of how the patent practitioner drafted and prosecuted the application. Compounding the problem is the time pressure created by moving to a firstinventor-to-file system under the recently enacted America Invents Act (AIA) and the anticipated increase in the filings of provisional applications with their many traps for the unwary. The course will teach you how to write provisional applications and draft and prosecute nonprovisional patent applications to avoid these pitfalls.
The Conundrum. Chaos now reigns supreme in Federal Circuit case law (and the judiciary of the U.S. district courts have begun to say so openly). For example, the importation of claim limitations from the specification into the claims albeit under the rubric of claim interpretation is now rampant, rendering many patents virtually worthless. A case in point is C.R. Bard, Inc. v. United States Surgical Corp., where the court imported the limitation pleated into a broad claim reciting a surgical mesh plug used for hernia repair, relying heavily in doing so on the Summary of the Invention that described a plug having pleats. The court repeatedly referenced the Summary of the Invention throughout the opinion, notwithstanding the fact that 23 narrow claims of the 25 in the patent did recite a pleated plug, without even mentioning, let alone reconciling, the immutable doctrine of claim differentiation that should have sustained the broad claims. Claim interpretation is only one chaos region. There are others where the Federal Circuit case law is equally inconsistent, including the law concerning the written description requirement, means-plusfunction clauses, the doctrine of equivalents, and prosecution history estoppel. This creates an immense dilemma for conscientious patent practitioners trying to write and prosecute patent applications that will provide their clients with the patent protection they deserve. Which cases should be relied on, and which should be ignored?
Comments from previous attendees: Practical advice for drafting enforceable patent claims, sprinkled with supporting legal authority. Spanning the gap between current Federal Circuit law and actual, practical tips on how to incorporate the latest law into successful prosecution practices. Good coverage of current law and potential pitfalls associated with certain practices (I'm planning to make changes to my practice with regard to various pitfalls you have pointed out).
Answer to the Conundrum. There is a sound basis for dealing with the dilemma generated by the Federal Circuit! A practical ex parte practice path is now in being that navigates through the chaos. Its road sign reads LP-CD (Low Profile, Common Denominator Practice). LP-CD, despite the chaos it penetrates and traverses, is charted clearly and boldly in this PRG course. Crafting & Drafting Winning Patents was designed and created by PRGs Professors Paul Gardner and Irving Kayton and enriched by the PRG course faculty.
This course distills everything from the law (and dicta) of the Federal Circuit and its predecessor courts that has a material bearing now, today, and in the foreseeable future, on how we must successfully: 1. Prepare for drafting the application; 2. Design what must be included in, and excluded from, the provisional application and the nonprovisional application specification and drawings and, very importantly, in what form and format it should be included; 3. Engage in claim drafting strategy designed to result in literal infringement, recognizing that this strategy must be taken into account as a principal factor in the earlier design of the specification; 4. Develop a protocol and a philosophy for prosecuting the application that advance and do not defeat the efforts in (1) through (3); and 5. Balance the accomplishments of (1) through (4) against, first, increased costs of crafting and drafting that sometimes accrue and, second, their effect on the
length of the patent term that will result, and third, the time pressure created by moving to a first-inventor-to-file system under the AIA. Crafting & Drafting will almost certainly effect a change in your patent law life, because the Federal Circuit has effectively (albeit unwittingly) dictated that it be so. It is noteworthy that many hundreds of patents have already issued using the Crafting & Drafting techniques set forth in this course (several of which will be reviewed), with beneficial effect in license and litigation negotiations. Legal ethics issues including the recent Therasense decision and its profound changes to the law of inequitable conduct and duty of disclosure will be covered from 9:15-10:15 a.m. on the last day of the course, as currently estimated.
Who Should Take This Course? This course is for patent practitioners with a minimum of two years of practice, and preferably more. It is sufficiently sophisticated for even the most experienced. The faculty knows this to be true because the problems and solutions about which they conferred and debated in bringing this course to fruition plumbed the depths of their combined patent law knowledge, experience and ongoing research and scholarship. Beginning patent practitioners should look forward to our four-day workshop designed specifically for them, The Winning Patents Workshop. For details visit our website at www.patentresources.com. Course Materials A comprehensive, one-volume course text, entitled Crafting & Drafting Winning Patents, and a bound set of lecture slides, are definitive on the subject and will be given to registrants at the course. The Textbook and slides are constantly updated and revised to include recent decisions and changes in the law including the applicable provisions of the AIA. G
njoy breathtaking views of the Resorts natural beauty from your casually elegant guest room, the perfect place to relax or catch up on business.
Designing Around Valid U.S. Patents

15.0 Hours
Course Faculty PRG has offered Designing Around Valid U.S. Patents for over 15 years, and it remains one of our most popular courses.
PATRICK BURNS
GREER, BURNS & CRAIN, LTD. CHICAGO, ILLINOIS
JOHN PINKERTON
ROSE WALKER DALLAS, TEXAS
PATRICIA PRIOR
GREER BURNS & CRAIN LTD. CHICAGO, IL
ROBERT TURNER
JONES DAY DALLAS, TEXAS
Course Description n Markman and Cybor, the Federal Circuit required district courts to construe claims as a matter of law and decided to review claim construction de novo. The object was to make claim construction predictable, so that claims would better perform their public notice function. The result has been an unmitigated disaster, often (but not always) reading limitations into the claims that the examiner did not require to establish patentability over the art of record. In fact, the court has often overridden the examination process, undermining the public notice function of claims ab initio. This course will explore the current condition of claim construction in detail and explain how competitors can use it to their advantage, even when the claims on their face are literally infringed.
Why Should You Take This Course? The Designing Around course distills the patent infringement analysis into comprehensive yet concise step-bystep checklists that can be used by attorneys at all experience levels to assist their clients to develop competitive, noninfringing products.
Comments from previous attendees: Practical explanation of case law to apply to patent drafting, infringement analysis and opinion writing. The substance was excellent. Presentations gave good overviews and the course books give encyclopedic detail for topics of interest. Well organized, very thorough, presenters all know their stuff. Four cookbooks covering (1) literal infringement, (2) infringement under the doctrine of equivalents, (3) infringement of means plus function claim elements, and (4) prosecution history estoppel, are provided. Using and following these cookbooks, which distill opinions by the Federal Circuit and the Supreme Court in cases from Pennwalt to Festo IX, any patent practitioner can counsel his or her client on how to design around the patented invention with almost certain impunity a design that appropriates the patented invention and that, prior to Pennwalt and its progeny, would have been held an infringement rather than the socially desirable activity of designing around.
This course will show practitioners representing potential infringers how to counsel competitive product design under the guidance of Federal Circuit and Supreme Court cases, which will almost always be viewed as effective designing around. How to conduct litigation to achieve a happy ending for your infringement-accused client will be set forth in elegant simplicity. Actual Demonstrations To ensure no confusion on anyones part in this exercise, the faculty and students will go through several claim construction exercises and compare their conclusions with the Federal Circuits claim construction in actual cases. A mock design around exercise will also be presented. The demonstration considers client, marketing and engineering perspectives, in addition to legal analysis. To prepare for the exercises and demonstration, the course faculty will illustrate the accused structures relative to the claims in the landmark, no-infringementby-claim construction cases of C.R. Bard v. U.S.
Surgical Corp. and Nystrom, the noinfringement-by-equivalents cases of Slimfold, Laitram and London, and the super landmark, no-equivalents-at-all after-prosecution-historyestoppel case of Festo IX. These and other cases are presented in literal, graphic clarity.
How to Draft Infringement and Noninfringement Opinions The substance presented in the course teaches what is important in opinions. But the faculty also explains the form and format such opinions should take to have the best posture in litigation for both the plaintiff and defendant. The legal ethical considerations involved in infringement opinions relative to willful infringement considerations are presented on the second day from 2:00 to 4:00 p.m., as currently estimated.
Course Materials The two-volume text for Designing Around Valid U.S. Patents is authored by the distinguished course faculty, each of whom has extensive successful litigation, prosecution and counseling experience. Nothing like these unique books exists anywhere else. G
he attentive staff at the Stillwater Spa are ready to provide you with a variety of rejuvenating services, including massage therapy, facial skin care, water therapy, and spa body treatments.
Drafting Patent License Agreements

Course Faculty The faculty teaches by sharing decades of combined experience in licensing.
15.0 Hours
D. PATRICK O'REILLEY
RONALD BLEEKER
D. BRIAN KACEDON
WILLIAM PRATT
FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, GARRETT & DUNNER, LLP WASHINGTON, DC
Course Description
his course and its text provide concrete drafting and negotiating advice with precise references to existing law.
Why Should You Take This Course? Licensing is a key strategy by which companies realize significant value from their patents and technology. The ability to draft, negotiate and interpret license agreements is a core skill for IP attorneys and other professionals who deal with licenses. This course provides a comprehensive overview of key licensing concepts, the drafting of key clauses in a license agreement, and the impact of related topics such as competition law, export control law and the Bayh-Dole Act. It is taught by experienced license professionals with an emphasis on practical considerations and provides valuable insights and discussion for both novices and more advanced practitioners.
The course lays the groundwork for a clause-by-clause examination of all significant elements of the patent licensing agreement. The practical questions always focused on are how and whether each element is sufficient to serve the business needs of the parties while remaining legally viable. The main components of typical licensing agreements, from the opening part through the execution and authentication provisions, are examined in detail. Practical, hypothetical illustrative examples are used, often in workshop form, with carefully crafted problem handouts distributed to the attendees during the course. Throughout the course, the faculty members emphasize achieving legally satisfactory drafting results by recognizing the logical principles that underlie the job to be done. Sample forms are used to explain the practical considerations upon which they are based. Law and precedent are presented in terms that make clear the legal reasoning behind recommended drafting approaches.
Comments from previous attendees: I have been drafting license agreements for the Federal government for 6 years, and this course helped tie together everything I've learned in this time. Suzanne Seavello Shope Centers for Disease Control & Prevention April 2010 attendee The information is very practical and relevant to the 'real world' problems encountered in drafting and reviewing agreements. Glenn Smith Bausch & Lomb October 2008 attendee
This is a course for the craftsman. Both the course and the text provide a solid basis for responding to virtually every license drafting problem that may arise. Even for the highly experienced licensing lawyer, new insights may be provided; at the very least, the course will be a rich, comprehensive refresher. For the less experienced licensing lawyer, it will open vistas, both with respect to hidden problems and to mechanisms for dealing with them. Legal ethics in license negotiations and misuse issues will be presented from 9:00 to 10:30 a.m. on the second day, as currently estimated.
Course Materials The text for the course is the Sixth Edition of the classic, Drafting Patent License Agreements (BNA), by Brian G. Brunsvold, D. Patrick OReilley and D. Brian Kacedon. The thoroughness of the text and accompanying slides will minimize the need for note-taking at
the program. Moreover, this Sixth Edition includes a computer disk, which has a set of form paragraphs that can be incorporated, with careful editing, into a license agreement to be prepared by the course attendee. The hardcopy edition of the course text will be given to each attendee at the program. The
volume containing the printed slides that will be used throughout the lectures will also be provided at the course; this volume will include extensive license drafting workshop materials and Justice Department licensing guidelines. G
ocated on 26 acres overlooking breathtaking Estero Bay Aquatic Preserve, this enticing Bonita Springs Florida hotel offers limitless recreation, personalized service, and attention to detail at every turn.
Due Diligence Investigations

Course Faculty
15.0 Hours
The faculty, considered collectively, have participated in over 100 due diligence evaluations and will take you through the process soup to nuts, whether you are representing the target or the acquirer.
BRYAN DINER ANTHONY GUTOWSKI ANDREW HOLTMAN
FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, GARRETT & DUNNER, LLP WASHINGTON, DC AND RESTON, VA
Course Description
his course is designed to provide attendees with a comprehensive approach to conducting intellectual property (IP) due diligence investigations, with a particular emphasis on issues relating to U.S. patent law.
The panel will share practical techniques and strategies for conducting investigations in a thorough and efficient manner. These techniques and strategies apply to both large and small transactions, and they have applicability irrespective of the nature of the specific transaction or the party you might be representing. Why Should You Take This Course? As the economic noose tightens around your clients necks, now is the time for the patent practitioner to be empowered to increase his suitor clients revenues, with excellent return on investment, by becoming a master due diligence provider on both acquisitions of targets IP and licenseins of that IP. By the same token, those who represent the targets must know the principles of power for molding the targets IP strategies to maximize income from either takeovers or license-outs. The critically acclaimed Due Diligence course is designed to raise your game to new levels, whether you are representing suitors or targets. The course is designed as an interactive, practical program implementing case study examples and lecture topics addressing a wide range of issues, including attorney-client privilege, claim construction, inequitable conduct and business method patents. The lively and entertaining presentation covers every phase of a due diligence investigation. Beginning with the initial involvement of IP counsel, the dynamic panel will navigate the course through the early information-gathering phases, drawing in the attendees as part of the due diligence team to spot critical IP issues that can make or break a deal. The panel also will share effective strategic approaches to focus the investigation during the plunge into the data room, and to facilitate making recommendations to the client that could ultimately affect the price and structure of the deal. The concluding sessions of the program cover risk management issues, providing invaluable and practical suggestions for contractual considerations, including effective use of representations and warranties. Topics discussed in the course are not only applicable to investigating a targets IP portfolio, but also provide helpful insight for preparing a portfolio for suitors. Additionally, a full course book is provided at the course. In short, the knowledge gained from this course should assist you in recognizing and avoiding the multitudinous due diligence pitfalls, while more effectively assessing and managing risk endemic in business transactions involving complex IP rights and issues.
Comment from previous attendee: "This course offered a wealth of practical advice. I am leaving with a 'to do' list. Each instructor had great stories about real-life due diligence situations. The stories kept the class interesting." Elaine Sale Argos Therapeutics, Inc. April 2009 attendee
The faculty, four partners at Finnegan, Henderson, are all patent attorneys with extensive experience in due diligence investigations. In the aggregate, the panel has over 100 years of experience in IP practice, and expertise in several different areas of technology. Throughout the course, the faculty shares interesting war stories, observations and practical tips for conducting the investigation in a comprehensive and efficient manner.
An hour of the course, on the second day from 2:45 to 3:45 p.m., as currently estimated, will be dedicated to potential ethical issues and inequitable conduct hazards that may arise during an IP due diligence investigation.
Course Materials The treatise, Due Diligence Investigations, was written by the Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner faculty and will be given to attendees at the course. This treatise aims to cover virtually every situation that can arise in the course of a due diligence investigation. G
he casual Tarpon Bay Restaurant has a beach cottage vibe, and a palette of soft greens and creamy beige complement the lush gardens just beyond its doors.
Federal Circuit Law (2010-2012)

Course Faculty
INCLUDING COMMENTARY on the America Invents Act
15.0 Hours
The one-of-a-kind faculty, all past Law Clerks and Technical Advisors spanning the courts history, provide matchless inside perspective and candid, unequaled insight to Federal Circuit law past, present and future. This now becomes particularly unique given the America Invents Act of 2011 (AIA), and the lecturers commentary on whether and how the AIA may affect Federal Circuit law.
GALE PETERSON
COX SMITH SAN ANTONIO, TX (FORMER TECHNICAL ADVISOR TO THE LATE CHIEF JUDGE MARKEY)
SHARON ISRAEL
MAYER BROWN LLP HOUSTON, TX (FORMER LAW CLERK TO CIRCUIT JUDGE LOURIE)
JON HOKANSON
LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH LLP, LOS ANGELES, CA (FORMER TECHNICAL ADVISOR TO THE LATE CIRCUIT JUDGE MILLER)
JASON FOWLER
COVINGTON & BURLING LLP WASHINGTON, DC (FORMER LAW CLERK TO CIRCUIT JUDGE LINN)
America Invents Act of 2011 (AIA) Why Should You Take This Course? Each week the Federal Circuit publishes opinions that materially clarify and sometimes alter existing practice. One cannot competently practice as a patent attorney today, in prosecution, litigation, counseling or licensing without an understanding of the Federal Circuits most recent opinions. The distinguished faculty of Federal Circuit Law (2010-2012) will expertly guide you through two years of relevant and up-to-the-minute cases in an interactive lecture format that encourages active attendee participation. Moreover, lecturers will discuss new cases in the context of prior cases (many outside the two-year time span), thus giving you not only current law, but also a perspective on how the law has changed. The AIA was signed into law by President Obama on September 16, 2011, and represents, by many interpretations, the most significant change to the U.S. patent system since 1952. The Act, among other things, initiates a first-inventor-to-file system (FITF), and includes provisions on post grant review (PGR), inter-partes review (IPR), preissuance and comment, supplemental examination, a revised grace period and redefinition of prior art to include subject matter that is otherwise available to the public, expands the defense of prior commercial use, retains best mode as a disclosure requirement, but removes best mode as a ground of invalidity, and significantly alters the false marking statute. But those are just the highlights. Apart from the sweeping changes, including a rewrite of Section 102, the Act has sections that will raise questions for years to come until resolved through the courts. Some portions of the Act became effective immediately other portions variously become effective 1 year or 18 months after signing. In general, the FITF portions become effective for applications filed on or after March 16, 2013, and for years to come, practitioners will have to practice under parallel systems the old law and the new law. The lecturers will explain, as appropriate, how the results in particular cases may be affected by the AIA.
Course Description f you have not been reading and closely analyzing all of the Federal Circuits patent opinions during the past years, you may unwittingly be flying blind in some areas of your practice. In virtually every area of patent practice, surprising and often startling opinions are emanating from the court. Often those opinions are at variance with established precedent, but without any admission or acknowledgement of the variance by the panel majorities despite pointed, compelling demonstrations thereof in dissents and concurrences. From Ariad Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Eli Lilly Co. (2010) to Media Technologies Licensing, LLC v. Upper Deck Co. (2010) and beyond, this course provides deep insight into the Federal Circuits opinions over the past two years and tells you what you need to know to continue to be an effective practitioner. As Chief Judge Rader opines, by understatement, these cases must leave practitioners in a quandary. Indeed! Clearly ex parte practice is not what it once was.
Perhaps indicative of the courts split on claim construction, for example, is the opinion in Retractable Technologies, Inc. v. Becton, Dickinson & Co. (2011). The panel majority, led by Judge Lourie, concluded that body in the claims required a one-piece body, while the dissent by Chief Judge Rader urged that the claim language and claim differentiation clearly required the conclusion that body was not limited to a one-piece body. A divided court declined to rehear this case en banc, yet the split in the court still percolates. The court also continually issues panel opinions that do not necessarily overturn prior panel opinions, but significantly limit the same. An example is In re Katz Interactive Call Processing Patent Litigation (2011), that limits WMS Gaming, Inc. v. International Game Technology (1999) and Aristocrat Technologies Australia Pty Ltd v. International Game Technology (2008), in the area of means-plusfunction limitations. One of the areas that harbors the most unsettling and startling developments is the courts linking of claim construction to the written description requirement, an area that, according to Chief Judge Rader, has become opaque to the point of obscuring other areas of this courts law. This linking has resulted in a number of seemingly inconsistent panel opinions, especially in instances where the patent-in-suit has facially broad claims, but a narrowly drafted specification. In Ariad Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Eli Lilly Co., the court en banc confirmed that there is a separate written description requirement that applies outside of the priority contextthat separate and apart from whether the specification enables the claims, the specification must contain a written description of the invention. The court remains splintered on this issue, however, and several judges believe that the invalidation of a claim on the basis that it is broader than the invention described in the specification is inconsistent with the Federal Circuits rule of claim construction that embodiments from the specification should not be imported as limitations to the claims. Also, in Crown Packaging Technology, Inc. v. Ball Metal Beverage Container Corp. (2011), the court, in an opinion by District Judge Whyte, N.D. Calif., sitting by designation, and over a dissent by Circuit Judge Dyk, reversed a district courts conclusion that the specification lacked sufficient written description support given the breadth of the claims, noting that original claims, in some instances, may provide written description support, despite statements to the contrary in Ariad. Nevertheless, Judge Moore, writing for the court in Boston
Scientific Corp. v. Johnson & Johnson (2011), reiterated the rule from Regents of the Univ. of Cal. v. Eli Lilly & Co. (1997) that [a] written description of an invention involving a chemical genus, like a description of a chemical species, requires a precise definition, such as by structure, formula, [or] chemical name, of the claimed subject matter sufficient to distinguish it from other materials. Another hot topic is joint infringement. The Federal Circuit has taken Akamai Technologies, Inc. v. Limelight Networks, Inc. and McKesson Technologies, Inc. v. Epic Systems Corp. for en banc review, but regardless of the outcome, joint infringement may depend on whether a claim may avoid a conclusion that multiple entities are required to infringe if the claim simply defines the environment in which infringement must occur per Advanced Software Design Corp. v. Fiserv, Inc. (2011). The Federal Circuit continues to surprise the bar in other areas as well with its statutory interpretations. For example, in August Technology Corp. v. Camtek, Ltd. (2011), the court rejected a jury instruction based on the AIPLAs model jury instructions, and concluded that a device may be the subject of an offer for sale prior to Its being ready for patenting, but also concluding that there is no actual offer for sale until after conception. An additional example - although the fundamental grounds for determining novelty and loss of right to patent under 35 U.S.C. 102 have been part of the statute since 1793, and most certainly since 1836 and 1870, the Federal Circuit continues to decide some cases on the narrow ground of accepting or rebutting partys arguments however bizarre rather than the underpinnings of the statutes. In Solvay S.A. v. Honeywell International, Inc. (2010), for example, the court concludes, on at best shallow reasoning in response to misguided party arguments, and seemingly uncritical reliance on an ambiguous statutory amendment, that when 102(g)(2) is construed as a prior art subsection, a prior actual reduction to practice in this country before the patentees earliest date of invention does not qualify as prior art if the reduction to practice is by one who does not qualify as an inventor who conceived the invention. Never before has novelty turned on showing inventorship. This is one example, though, of where the AIA may affect the result. But the pendulum swings. After the Supreme Courts opinion in KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc. (2007), seemingly rejecting at least a rigid showing of a motivation to
combine reference teachings, the validity of many patents drawn to mechanical and many electrical inventions under 103 became doubtful. However, the pendulum appears to be swinging back Judge (now Chief Judge) Raders dissent in Media Technologies Licensing, LLC v. Upper Deck Co. (2010) that [l]urking just beneath the surface of this courts blindness to the underlying facts supporting non-obviousness is a bias against non-technical arts, seems to have sparked (albeit not in that case) a renewed view of the requirement for motivation. Nevertheless, some panels of the Federal Circuit now permit reliance on common sense to find patents invalid under 103, and more egregiously, despite the lack of any reference supporting the same. When this will end is anybodys guess. But Chief Judge Raders opinion in Unigene Laboratories, Inc. v. Apotex, Inc. (2011), suggests that the court will increasingly insist on some showing of motivation, thus perhaps swinging the pendulum back pre-KSR. This course examines the Federal Circuits postKSR cases in detail. Will the many areas of inequitable conduct currently in doubt be resolved by the Federal Circuits en banc view in Therasense? And the courts adoption of a but-for-plus standard of materiality? Doubtful but maybe. And what about the flood of cases held back pending the Federal Circuits decision in Therasense? The course will examine Therasense in detail, with suggestions on complaince with Rule 56(a). The AIA also offers supplemental examination which may cure alleged inequitable conduct. Claims of legal malpractice are increasing at an alarming rate. The Federal Circuit has provided some solace in Immunocept, LLC v. Fulbright & Jaworski LLP (2007), holding that it has jurisdiction of legal malpractice claims under certain circumstances. In addition, though, what conduct is subject to sanctions? The Federal Circuit continues to issue opinions that affect the basic practice of patent law. The Supreme Court has also been active in developing the patent law, often rebuffing the Federal Circuit for failing to adhere to Supreme Court precedent. For example, in In re Bilski, the Federal Circuit attempted to clarify the test for determining whether a claim recites patentable subject matter under 101 by holding that its machine or transformation test is the sole and exclusive inquiry. The Supreme Court promptly rejected the Federal Circuits machine or transformation test as the sole test for patentable subject matter, but declined to articulate a clear test to replace the ... continued on next page.
Federal Circuits test thus leaving a vacuum for the Federal Circuit to fill. The course will cover post-Bilski developments, and will sort through the uncertainty left in the wake of Bilski. But each post-Bilski case seems to raise additional questions. For example, a panel in CyberSource Corp. v. Retail Decisions, Inc. (2011), questioned the validity of Beauregard-type claims, but as a panel opinion could not overturn Beauregard. Does that signal the demise of such claims? In other areas, the Federal Circuit has quashed long-standing abuses. In Uniloc USA, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp. (2011), for example, the Federal Circuit held, in the area of damages, that as a matter of Federal Circuit law that the 25 percent rule of thumb is a fundamentally flawed tool for determining a baseline royalty rate in a hypothetical negotiation. The 25% rule, used for more than a decade, thus disappears. In yet other areas, the Federal Circuit has further explained and thus limited prior even en banc opinions, such as in Spectralytics, Inc. v. Cordis Corp. (2011) further explaining and limiting In re Seagate Technology, LLC, (2007) (en banc).
Those are but highlights. Federal Circuit opinions even over the brief span of two years have created law that practitioners must know especially in light of the changing composition of the court. Smoothing the Troubled Waters? PRG formerly characterized this course as Recognizing & Understanding Federal Circuit Russian Roulette. The continually strong attendance at presentations of this Federal Circuit course suggests that the patent bar recognizes this aphorism to ring true. In many respects, this is a user-designed dynamic course. Course evaluations are collected and analyzed to determine the topics and emphasis users desire. For the many that have attended this course punctually every two years, the curriculum, in response to user input, retains the topics you have come to expect, but has been expanded to include separate chapters and lectures on Federal Circuit en banc cases and Supreme Court cases, selected important cases that do not conveniently fit within a single topic (crossover cases) as well as noteworthy practice & procedure cases, noteworthy appellate practice cases, joint infringement, and selected Hatch-Waxman cases, among others and now including the AIA.
All of the above represents just some of the continually breaking judicial news from the Federal Circuit that will be covered at the Federal Circuit Law course. As attested by hundreds of past course attendees, the faculty presents just the right amount of factual and legal detail for mastering each case discussed. Legal ethics and inequitable conduct will be presented on the second day from 3:00 to 4:00 p.m., as currently estimated. Course Materials The full substance of the course is captured in the Federal Circuit Patent Law three-volume text, which extends over 1,500 pages. G Comment from previous attendee: I've been attending this course, periodically, over a number of years, and it continues to get better & better. Steven Fontana Fontana International October 2009 attendee
njoy the fountains and palm trees as you take a stroll through the Resort's beautiful grounds.
Patent Damages
15.0 Hours
Course Faculty All three instructors have been involved in the damages phase of numerous litigation cases, including ivi4 in its successful affirmation of an over $200 million verdict against Microsoft; Crucible Steel Company in its successful effort to obtain an injunction and travel damages against Kloster Speed Steel; and 3M in a dispute with Dentsply, where a creative defensive damage argument resulted in a substantially lower mediation and settlement award.
WILLIAM W. COCHRAN
COCHRAN FREUND & YOUNG, LLC FORT COLLINS, DENVER AND BOULDER, COLORADO
MICHAEL C. ELMER
FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, GARRETT & DUNNER, LLP PALO ALTO, CALIFORNIA
CHRISTOPHER BENSON
FULBRIGHT & JAWORSKI L.L.P. AUSTIN, TX
Course Description
he possibility to sue infringers is at the very foundation of US patent law. It is what makes acquiring patents meaningful and is the main enforcement tool of patentees. In the US, more than anywhere else in the world, infringement damages can and do total in the millions.
What does a patentee need to know in order to maximize the chances of a large damages award? What does an alleged infringer need to know to avoid one?
Why Should You Take This Course? Infringement damages in the US can and do total in the millions of dollars. Whether you are representing a patentee wanting to maximize the chances of a large damages award or an alleged infringer trying to avoid one, this course will help you to master this critical aspect of patent law.
Patent damages, an essential remedy for patent holders, is a crucial area of the law for all patent practitioners to understand, whether representing patentees or alleged infringers. This course will equip patent practitioners with the tools necessary to knowledgably and expertly advocate their clients damages demands by exploring the underlying basis for patent damages, how to calculate a reasonable royalty, establishment of lost profits in a patent damages case, evaluation of forum-shopping considerations, enhanced damages, and innovative damage arguments as well as a comparative analysis of U.S. patent damages to patent damages in other countries. This course will discuss and provide the latest case law from the Federal Circuit, and comprehensively cover the current state of the law regarding patent damages.
Topics covered in this course include: General principles of patent damages Actual damages and reasonable royalties under 35 USC 284 Steps to calculate a reasonable royalty The remedies of compensatory lost profits, attorney's fees, prejudgment interest and cost for patent infringement Enhanced damages and willful infringement Comparative analysis of patent damages in US with other countries G
Patent Infringement Litigation

Course Faculty
15.0 Hours
The course is taught by highly experienced trial lawyers whose record of victories in patent cases is truly remarkable and includes: Personal Audio v. Apple ($12 million judgment, post-trial motions pending); AMD v. Samsung (case involving seven affirmative patents and six counterclaim patents, confidential settlement); Pitney Bowes v. Hewlett-Packard ($400 million); Fonar v. General Electric ($110 million); Atlantic Richfield et al v. Unocal ($69 million); Honeywell v. Minolta ($96 million); Honeywell v. JVC ($30 million); St. Clair v. Canon ($34 million); St. Clair v. Sony ($25 million); Grantley v. Clear Channel Communications ($89 million); TriStrata Technology v. Mary Kay ($43 million); Eolas v. Microsoft (confidential settlement after remand); Ricoh v. Pitney Bowes (defense verdict affirmed on appeal); General Motors v. General Electric (summary judgment of invalidity, affirmed on appeal).
COLE M. FAUVER BECKY THORSON
ROBINS, KAPLAN, MILLER & CIRESI, LLP MINNEAPOLIS, MN
DAVID SWENSON
Course Description his course is the most practical, immediately usable patent infringement litigation course ever presented by Patent Resources Group (and perhaps by any institution). The focus is on patent litigation (not litigation in general). The course starts at the first concept of the idea to litigate and the critical initial decision to file suit, continues through discovery and trial, and on to the end of post-trial motions, as well as initial defensive considerations and developing and implementing defensive strategies throughout the case. The course includes a live demonstration of a Markman hearing and a section on damages and injunctive relief.
Why Should You Take This Course? The Patent Infringement Litigation course will show you how to develop and execute a winning strategy to coordinate all aspects of a complex patent case and achieve your business objectives. We will take you through the whole process, from the first concept of the idea to litigate to posttrial motions.
Comment from previous attendee: Well done in all regards. Experienced practitioners, concrete examples, and quite good and interesting. Steven Berryman, Quarles & Brady LLP April 2010 attendee The course is designed for and directed to corporate counsel who have or expect to have patent litigation supervision responsibilities; experienced litigators who seek to acquire increased competence and abilities in this expanding practice specialty; and private practitioners with limited litigation experience seeking to expand their practice. Legal ethics in the context of willful infringement issues will be presented from 3:15 to 4:15 p.m. on the second day, as currently estimated. New for 2012 is a detailed treatment of the America Invents Act and how it is impacting litigation right now, including:
Provisions restricting joinder of multiple defendants in a single action Elimination of the best mode defense Prior commercial use defense Virtual marking and limitations on false marking lawsuits Course Materials The course is based on the thoroughlyresearched textbook, updated annually by Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi L.L.P authors to reflect the latest statutory changes, and critical rulings from the Federal Circuit and district courts on infringement, invalidity, damages, discovery, experts, and more. The course materials also include two resource volumes of supplemental, real-life illustrative litigation papers that support the text. All three volumes will be handed out at the course, along with a printed copy of the course slides (with room for note taking) that will be a particularly convenient and useful reference. G
lide down the 140-foot corkscrew slide at the Adventure Pool or catch up on some leisure reading under Floridas amazing blue skies.
Pharma & Biotech Strategies for Patent Prosecution, Hatch-Waxman & Litigation
Course Faculty The faculty, all senior principals in Fish & Richardsons vaunted life sciences group, has
16.5 Hours
Bonita Springs, FL March 25-27, 2012 (Sun-Tues) Hyatt Regency Coconut Point Resort & Spa 8:15 a.m. - 11:30 a.m. and 1:30 p.m. 4:15 p.m. (Sun-Tues)
many decades of experience counseling pharmaceutical and biotech companies in patent prosecution, litigation, and Hatch-Waxman strategies. They teach these topics in the same way they approach them for their clients as a seamless whole.
JANIS FRASER
TERRY MAHN
JONATHAN SINGER
MARK ELLINGER
FISH & RICHARDSON PC BOSTON, MA MINNEAPOLIS, MN WASHINGTON, DC NEW YORK, NY SAN DIEGO, CA
Course Description
D
Why Should You Take This Course? In an industry where billions of dollars often hinge on the viability of a single patent claim, you can't afford to make mistakes. Brush up on the skills needed to prosecute, evaluate, and enforce pharmaceutical and biotech claims in an ever-changing legal and economic climate. Learn cutting-edge techniques for putting the HatchWaxman laws to work for your company's benefit. This highlyregarded course is taught by an experienced team who puts it all together for you.
iscovering and developing new pharmaceuticals whether biomolecules or traditional small molecules entails extraordinary R&D costs (some estimate nearly $1B per drug) with no guarantee of success.
Likewise, biotech companies invest enormous resources in identifying and validating the targets and creating platform technologies that are becoming more and more essential for the drug discovery process. Without the protection afforded by patents and various Hatch-Waxman drug exclusivities, the pharmaceutical and biotech industries as we know them would not exist. At the same time, patents on research tools and drug discovery targets can frustrate the early-stage research efforts of competitors seeking to discover novel drugs. In addition, the generic industry is increasingly aggressive in challenging patents covering FDA-approved drugs, the boundaries of the HatchWaxman Safe Harbor are shifting, FDA reforms have limited the Orange Book as a weapon for pioneers, gene patenting is under serious challenge, and the 2010 legislation authorizing an approval pathway for biosimilars may fundamentally change the life cycle management of biomolecule pharmaceuticals. Against this backdrop, biotechnology and pharmaceutical patent law in particular continues to evolve rapidly perhaps faster than patent law in any other field with numerous abrupt shifts and reversals of policy just in the last decade.
Comment from previous attendee: [The course] provided very practical information related to specification and claims preparation, as well as amendments and arguments to make (and not to make) during prosecution. I also appreciated the in-depth discussion of case law, both historical and current cases, and how they impact biotech practice. Kathryn Hester Dunlap Codding P.C. April 2010 attendee
Course Focus The course conveys both fundamentals and advanced legal strategies in three major, interrelated areas: (1) Biotech and Pharma Patent Prosecution; (2) Hatch-Waxman and Biosimilars strategies; and (3) Pharmaceutical and Biotech Patent Enforcement. These topics are taught as a seamless whole by four principals from Fish & Richardson PC, who utilize frequent cross-references to highlight the interplay among all the topics. For example, relevant patent case law (including the most recent biotech and pharma cases) is discussed from different viewpoints in the context of prosecution and enforcement.
An expert on the Hatch-Waxman and biosimilars laws will provide a coherent overview of these complex provisions; another lecturer will explain these laws critical importance to patent enforcement in the pharmaceutical and biotech fields; and others will show how these laws inform strategy in prosecution. Strategies for managing the life cycle of patented drugs is a theme that echoes throughout the course. This course provides valuable, practical information for the patent practitioner, whether in-house or in private practice, to use in maximizing protection of biotechnology and pharmaceutical inventions. The litigator will come away with a comprehensive understanding of the pertinent case law and concepts necessary to enforce pharmaceutical and biotechnology patents, or to recognize the weaknesses in improvidently granted patents. Company executives tasked with making strategic decisions based on their own companys patent portfolio as well as those of their competitors will benefit immeasurably from the broad understanding of biotech and pharmaceutical patent and Hatch-Waxman law gleaned from this course.
Course Highlights A key feature of the course is its coverage of biotechnology patent law, including both established principles and current developments (such as the recently enacted overhaul of the U.S. patent statute) in this rapidly changing area of the law. In addition, the course highlights patent issues that crop up frequently in the pharmaceutical arts where biotech and small molecule drugs overlap: issues such as enablement, written description, obviousness post-KSR, inherent anticipation, patent-eligible subject matter, inventorship, overbreadth, functional limitations, claim construction, infringement based on in vivo conversion, and infringement under the doctrine of equivalents. The course will present claim strategies for the increasingly common situation in which an organisms genome has been published, and the invention focuses on a single gene. Other important topics include screening or diagnostic assays, methods of treatment, personalized medicine, polymorphs, transgenic animals, antibodies, RNAi, single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), and reachthrough claims. Concepts such as impractical claims (claims difficult or impossible to enforce) are illuminated with real and hypothetical examples. The increasing importance of the
pharmaceutical label as a way to extend the life cycle of an approved drug is explored and specific strategies proposed. Since another PRG course (Chemical Patent Practice) ably covers the fundamentals of chemical prosecution in great detail, the present course instead focuses on issues that concern biotechnology and pharmaceutical inventions in particular. Course Materials Each attendee will receive an over-1000page, two-volume set of course materials. Fondly known as the Purple Book for reasons that will be apparent once you receive yours, these materials are updated by Fish & Richardson each year to keep them current with new cases, new U.S. Patent and Trademark Office directives, and evolving technology. They cover many more topics, and in more depth, than the course itself. The Purple Book is an invaluable resource a very practical how-to manual you will use every day. You will also receive a book of printed lecture slides when you arrive at the course. G
njoy a delicious meal and relax as you overlook the water and palms blowing in the Florida breeze.
Post-Grant Patent Practice: Review, Reexamination, Reissue, and Supplemental Examination

15.0 Hours
Course Faculty The instructors have extensive experience representing both patent owners and accused infringers in reexaminations and frequently file and prosecute reissue applications. They are actively involved in bar associations efforts to help the PTO design and implement the new review proceedings created by the America Invents Act (AIA). They have written widely on reexamination, reissue and review topics for Intellectual Property Today.
KEVIN B. LAURENCE
MATTHEW C. PHILLIPS
STOEL RIVES LLP SALT LAKE CITY, UT AND PORTLAND, OR
Course Description
Why Should You Take This Course? About 5-6 years ago, reexamination emerged as a popular venue for validity challenges, either alone or alongside court battles. The reasons for that shift were simple. The PTOs Central Examination unit provided a forum where claims are given their broadest possible interpretation. In addition, a reexamination can result in many favorable outcomes, at a small fraction of the cost of litigation. The America Invents Act (AIA) shifts the balance even further in favor of the PTO as the patent validity battlefield of the future by creating new, more powerful, fast-track, litigation-like review proceedings, including post-grant review and inter partes review. Whatever side of the battle you are on, you must know how to engage in the new battlefields called review as well as the existing battlefield called reexamination.
Ten years ago courts were essentially the sole arbiters of validity. About 5-6 years ago, reexamination emerged as a popular venue for validity challenges, either alone or alongside court battles. The reasons for that shift were simple: Would you rather bring your validity attack before an experienced patent examiner in the PTOs Central Reexamination Unit where the claims are given their broadest reasonable interpretation and do not enjoy a presumption of validity, or a jury in the Eastern District of Texas? The answer becomes all the more obvious when one considers that a reexamination can cancel claims, eliminate liability for past infringement, create intervening rights to continue accused infringement in the future, open up design-around opportunities, create a more favorable prosecution history, defeat a charge of willful infringement, help avoid an injunction, bolster an inequitable conduct defense, and sometimes enable a stay of expensive litigation. All of this can be achieved at a small fraction of the cost of litigation. The America Invents Act (AIA) shifts the balance even further in favor of the PTO as the patent validity battlefield of the future by creating new more powerful, fast-track, litigation-like review proceedings, including post-grant review and inter partes review. These reviews will be decided by a panel of three administrative judges within 12-18 months after being instituted, will permit limited discovery, and will be appealed directly to the Federal Circuit. These new proceedings significantly improve on the structure of their predecessor, inter partes reexamination, just as inter partes reexamination was surging in popularity.
he battleground of patent validity is shifting from courts to the PTO.
Comment from previous attendee: The materials are outstanding. I will use as reference materials in the future. Lecturers were wide open to questions and very responsive. Interspersing of war stories and examples kept the presentation interesting. Charles Burpee Warner Norcross & Judd LLP October 2009 attendee
This two-and-a-half-day course provides comprehensive training on indispensible tools for patent prosecutors and litigators, including new tools created by the AIA: Ex parte reexamination Inter partes reexamination Post-grant review (new under the AIA) Inter partes review (new under the AIA)
Transitional program to review business method patents (new under the AIA) Reissue Supplemental examination (new under the AIA) The course covers strategies, tactics, best practices and case studies for reexamination and reissue. In addition, the course will cover the statutory and regulatory framework for the AIAs new review proceedings and supplemental examination. The course is for both patent practitioners who appear before the PTO in these proceedings, as well as litigators who must deal with the increasingly common role of PTO proceedings in the context of disputes. For patent challengers, the course provides training to: Analyze the benefits and disadvantages of reexamination and review as compared to litigation Make well-informed choices between all types of reexamination and review proceedings Understand the critical role of reexamination and review in the context of a dispute and develop reexamination and/or review strategies based on anticipated or concurrent litigation Appreciate estoppel implications both official and unofficial of reexamination and review Utilize reexamination and review to obtain a stay or other benefits in related litigation
Unravel the AIAs review statutes and decipher the PTOs proposed review rules to really understand how reviews will be conducted Prepare a request for reexamination or petition for review that complies with all requirements and gets granted Learn what the reexamination statistics really mean Advantageously utilize the different standards applied for claim interpretation at the PTO and claim construction in litigation as well as the differing burdens of proof Recognize possible changes to the construction of the claims in the litigation based on the reexamination or review that opens up design-around opportunities, creates a more favorable prosecution history for the purpose of claim construction, or impacts estoppel theories Create intervening rights that eliminate liability for past infringement or allow continuation of accused infringement in the future Tactically use serial ex parte reexamination requests and protests in reissue Correctly and strategically use petitions and declarations Understand the repercussions that reexamination and review can have on settlement The course balances the perspectives of patent challengers and patent owners so the above items are also presented from the view of the patent owner. Additionally, the course provides training for patent owners to:
Choose between ex parte reexamination, reissue and supplemental examination to immunize a patent from a third-party attack Avoid, when possible, intervening rights that arise via the cancellation or amendment of claims or from mere argument regarding claim scope Defensively utilize related proceedings, reissue continuations and merger to maximize flexibility and advantage Select information to be disclosed to the PTO from concurrent litigation or other PTO proceedings Understand the timing of events in all postissuance PTO proceedings so that you are not caught off guard Navigate the maze of reexamination and reissue procedures to avoid unfortunately common mistakes Master the recapture rule in reissue applications Understand when and how to utilize a certificate of correction or disclaimer, rather than reexamination, reissue or supplemental examination Many other topics related to post-grant PTO proceedings are covered in the course. Legal ethics in the context of reexamination and reissue prosecution will be presented from 10:15 a.m. to 11:15 a.m. on the third day, as currently estimated. G
rift off to sleep in your signature Hyatt Grand Bed, fitted with sumptuous linens and a down duvet.
Procuring and Enforcing Business Method and Other Software-Based Patents After Bilski and BMC
15.0 Hours
Course Faculty The faculty for this course has prosecuted scores of software-related patents, for business methods and more traditional computer-based technical subject matters, over a collective USPTO experience of more than 60 years. Each has also been involved in litigation and licensing of softwarerelated patents. They can provide a wide range of viewpoints from which to consider strategies for procuring, exploiting and enforcing software patents.
Bonita Springs, FL
March 29-31, 2012 (Thur-Sat) Hyatt Regency Coconut Point Resort & Spa 8:15 a.m. 11:30 a.m. and 1:30 p.m. 4:45 p.m. (Thur-Fri) 8:15 a.m. 11:30 a.m. (Sat)
ALDO NOTO
ANDREWS KURTH LLP WASHINGTON, DC
STUART HEMPHILL
DEVAN PADMANABHAN
DORSEY & WHITNEY LLP MINNEAPOLIS, MN
Course Description his course addresses the difficult and sophisticated task of how best to claim, prosecute, and litigate software-based inventions in their rich variety so as to have their patents held not invalid and infringed by the Federal Circuit. But that rich variety requires a variety of disparate claiming, specification drafting, prosecution, and litigating techniques.
Why Should You Take This Course? This is a critical time to get an important update on software patent law, given: The impact of the America Invents Act (AIA). The need to understand the complex implications of the Bilski decisions. The decision finding no infringement when computer-based methods span borders (Research in Motion). The decision finding no infringement when multiple actors are involved in completing the infringement (Muniauction).
The America Invents Act (AIA) impacts software patents in general and business method patents in particular. Specifically, a new inter partes review proceeding is available during litigation for defendants to challenge certain business method patents at the USPTO on a wide variety of invalidity grounds.
The broad spectrum of available software patent protection opportunities that appeared available after State Street Bank and AT&T v. Excel was questioned in the Bilski decisions. In its Bilski decision, the CAFC retreated from the useful, concrete and tangible result analysis to tied to a particular machine or apparatus or transforms a particular article tests. The Supreme Court found this machine-ortransformation test useful but too narrow. It fell back on general principles of abstractness. It also declined to exclude all business methods from patentability, but it seemed to invite their close scrutiny. Courts as well as the USPTO continue to struggle with the application of the Supreme Court's decision and the CAFC decision it largely affirmed. Practitioners need to understand the signposts left by the Bilski decisions and their progeny.
Software-based inventions face another issue. Recent cases have suggested that infringement may be avoided when infringing activity crosses borders or multiple parties are involved in the acts or elements comprising infringement of a claim. The doctrine of joint infringement (a/ka divided infringement) as developed in BMC Resources, Inc. v. Paymentech, Muniauction Inc. v. Thomson Corp. and other cases poses particular problems for proving infringement as more computer-based inventions use processors, storage and specialized data processing services of others, sometimes located in the cloud. Using resources in the cloud can involve multiple actors and jurisdictions. The course and text address why different software applications (e.g., Internet-related software) require special claim drafting, prosecution or litigation techniques. Claim styles
and limitations designed to meet the somewhat unclear post-Bilski 101 standards are discussed. This course also explores the countercurrents arising from concern about the quality of some business method patents and from the open source movement. Legal ethics in the context of duty of disclosure under 37 CFR 1.56 and USPTO conflict of interest issues will be presented from 9:00 to 11:00 a.m. on the third day, as currently estimated.
Comments from previous attendees: Speakers were awesome, articulate, organized, knowledgeable and friendly. The material covered was very focused and practical. Thank you! Examples of claim types were great!
Course Materials The comprehensive text, written by its distinguished faculty, will be handed out at the course. G
et your cares slip away in the soothing spa pool while overlooking the green lushness of the natural Florida surroundings.
PRGs Spring Hotel Hyatt Regency Coconut Point Resort & Spa Bonita Springs, FL March 25-31, 2012
5001 Coconut Road Bonita Springs, FL 34134 239-444-1234
Reservations: 239-444-1234 For online reservations, please go to www.patentresources.com/HotelOverview.aspx and click on the Hotel Information link for Hyatt Regency Coconut Point Resort & Spa. Room reservations must be made by March 2, 2012. When making your reservation, be sure to identify yourself as a Patent Resources Group attendee to obtain the special PRG rate. Room rate: The sleeping room rate available to PRG attendees is only $249.00 per night, single or double, plus tax and a daily resort fee of $15 (normally $20). Receptions for Attendees and Faculty: PRG receptions provide an opportunity for networking, plus delicious, complimentary hors doeuvres and beverages on the first evenings of class: Sunday, March 25 and Thursday, March 29. Spouses, children and guests of attendees and faculty are welcome and are certain to have an enjoyable time. Transportation: The Resort is about 16 miles (approximately 25 minutes) south of Southwest Florida International Airport (RSW), which is served by a variety of major airlines with nonstop flights from many cities throughout the United States.
Don't Miss This Deal!
his rate of $249 per night is a 30% savings over the average rate at the resort.
PRGs Spring 2012 Program will be held at the lavish Hyatt Regency Coconut Point Resort & Spa in Bonita Springs, FL.
A Truly Amazing Venue

Situated on 26 lush acres on Estero Bay, the Hyatt Regency Coconut Point features the world-class Stillwater Spa; a championship 18hole golf course designed by Raymond Floyd; a 5000-square foot, lagoon-style Adventure Pool with a 140-foot corkscrew water slide; a huge Waterfall Pool; and an adults-only heated lap pool. Hotel guests may also take a short ferry ride to the Resort's private Gulf Coast beach at Big Hickory Island, arrange for a variety of water and wildlife excursions in Estero Bay, or kayak through the mangroves on the Estero River. Camp Coconut provides supervised entertainment and hands-on activities for children ages 3-12 (advance reservations suggested). The Hyatt Regency Coconut Point boasts seven restaurants and bars, including the fourdiamond Tanglewood Restaurant (serving breakfast, lunch, and dinner and featuring international cuisine), the casual Tarpon Bay Restaurant right on the water, and the Kofe Nut, the Resort's 24-hour, full service coffee shop that also provides picnic lunches and other supplies for beach excursions. Hotel facilities include a full-service business center, a 24-hour Stay Fit fitness center, wireless Internet access, and a DVD library. Self-parking is complimentary. For more information about the Hyatt Regency Coconut Point, go to: http://coconutpoint.hyatt.com/hyatt/hotels.
Named one of The Top 100 Hotels in the World in Travel + Leisures 2011 World's Best Awards!
Hyatt Regency Coconut Point Resort & Spa
REGISTRATION
Bonita Springs, FL March 25-31, 2012
Registration Deadline: March 2, 2012
Three-Day Courses:
Tuition for each three-day course is $2,195. March 25-27, 2012 (Sun-Tues)
Art & Science of Patent Searching Art & Science of Patent Searching and Chemical Patent Practice
REGISTRATION OPTIONS: Mail or Overnight: 1725 Jamieson Avenue Alexandria, VA 22314 FAX: (703) 892-4510 ONLINE: www.patentresources.com You may register online or by fax, mail or courier. You may submit tuition either by check, payable to Patent Resources Group, Inc., or by credit card (charges are authorized by your completion of this form). The course tuition does not include hotel accommodations or meals, but does include all instructional materials, and morning and afternoon refreshments, as well as PRGs reception-cocktail party.
Tel: 703-682-4860 Fax: 703-892-4510
Patentability, Validity & Infringement
www.patentresources.com
For information about registration deadlines; cancellation, transfer and substitution privileges; CLE; and other details, go to: www.patentresources.com
Optional Patent Searching Workshop (combined course and workshop is $2,590)
Comprehensive PCT Practice: How to Due Diligence Investigations Patent Damages
Master Its Challenges
Federal Circuit Law (2010-2012) Pharma and Biotech Strategies for Patent
Please note that the faculty members listed for each course are subject to change prior to the actual course date.
Prosecution, Hatch-Waxman & Litigation March 29-31, 2012 (Thurs-Sat)

Crafting and Drafting Winning Patents Designing Around Valid U.S. Patents Drafting Patent License Agreements Patent Infringement Litigation Post-Grant Patent Practice: Review, Procuring and Enforcing Business
Brochure Code: A12M1
I am an ACTIVE member of a State Bar that requires mandatory CLE hours. My State(s) & my Bar ID number(s) are:
1. __________ _________________________ STATE ID NO.

MR. DR. MS. PROF.
2. ___________ STATE
______________________ ID NO.
Name ___________________________________________ Title ________________________ Tel _____________________________________________ Fax ________________________ email ________________________________________________________________________ Organization ______________________________________ Suite or Mail Stop No. ___________ _________________________________________________________________ Street Address ORG. City/State ________________________________________ Zip Code ____________________
HOME
PLEASE PRINT
Reexamination, Reissue, and Supplemental Examination
Method and Other Software-Based Patents After Bilski and BMC
One-Day Course:
Tuition for the one-day course is $995. March 28, 2012 (Wed)
Monumental Changes, the Consequences and the Unanswered Questions SPECIAL RATE of only $495 if youre also taking a 3-day course. Discount will be applied when your order is processed.
GNEW COURSE America Invents Act:
Charge $______________________ to: VISA MasterCard American Express

Corporate Card Personal Card Government Card
PRINT Name of Cardholder SIGNATURE of Cardholder

If the credit card billing address is not the same as on this form, enter the billing address here:
Corporate Customer Code (if applicable) ___________________
Credit Card # _______________________________ Exp. ________/__________
atent Resources Group, the Alma Mater of 40,000 patent attorneys and agents, now offers customized ON-SITE training for selected courses on a negotiated basis! This is the perfect option for corporations that have 10 or more employees who need the same training. We'll come to your location and will customize the content as needed to meet your specific needs. If you prefer, we can also offer these courses remotely through webconferencing or videoconferencing.
PRG is currently offering these courses* ON-SITE:

Art and Science of Patent Searching: Patentability, Validity & Infringement This course comprehensively teaches how to conduct a professional patent search. The materials and content will be understood by anyone, from the inexperienced to advanced practitioners. The course is perfect for patent attorneys and agents, inventors, paralegals, or research managers anyone who will be involved in conducting searches or commissioning searches. Patent Law Guide for Inventors, Investors, Paralegals & NonPatent Lawyers This course presents that which the inventor, paralegal, and administrator should know (really, must know, according to case law) about patent law and its practice. It provides a bedrock of basic and empowering patent law information that will also be invaluable to non-patent attorneys engaged in any aspect of patent activity, such as licensing, litigating, or counseling.
Contact SVP-Sales Ted Klekman at (916) 404-3908 to learn more.
*Interested in having other courses taught on-site at your location? Ask us!
PRG is Accessible Wherever You Are!
ou are already familiar with our website at www.patentresources.com. But you can now also keep up with PRG on Twitter and Facebook.
Follow us on Twitter for interesting patent discussion and PRG course updates at http://www.twitter.com/PRGPatentLaw. Become a fan on Facebook to get the latest news at http://www.facebook.com/PatentResourcesGroup.
January 23-27, 2012 Patent Bar Review Course Newport Beach, CA (Orange County) Radisson Hotel Newport Beach March 12-16, 2012 Patent Bar Review Course Washington, DC (Alexandria, VA) PRG Training Center March 25-31, 2012 Advanced Courses Program Bonita Springs, FL Hyatt Regency Coconut Point Resort & Spa May 7-11, 2012 Patent Bar Review Course Chicago, IL Four Points by Sheraton Chicago Downtown/Magnificent Mile June 18-22, 2012 Patent Bar Review Course Boston, MA Radisson Hotel Boston
July 17-20, 2012 Winning Patents Workshop Washington, DC (Alexandria, VA) PRG Training Center July 31-August 3, 2012 Winning Patents Workshop Newport Beach, CA (Orange County) Radisson Hotel Newport Beach August 2012 Advanced Courses Program Washington, DC Check PRG website for dates and venue August 2012 Patent Administration: A Foundation for Success Washington, DC Check PRG website for dates and venue September 2012 Patent Administration: A Foundation for Success New York, NY Check PRG website for dates and venue
September 2012 Patent Bar Review Course New York, NY Check PRG website for dates and venue October 17-23, 2012 Advanced Courses Program Indian Wells, CA (Palm Springs) Hyatt Grand Champions Resort, Villas and Spa November 5-9, 2012 Patent Bar Review Course San Francisco, CA Check PRG website for venue
Register online now at www.patentresources.com


1 7 2 5 J A M I E S ON AV E N U E ALE XANDRIA, VA 22314
Pre-sort Std. U.S. Postage PAID Western American Mailers
UNPARALLELED COURSES AT AN AMAZING VENUE!
Be Prepared for the America Invents Act!

You cant afford not to invest in your future. See page 2 for details and register today at www.patentresources.com.
Patent Resources Group provides the industry's leading patent law education programs. The company has taught patent law and related courses to 40,000 patent attorneys, agents, engineers and scientists since 1969.
A12M1

PRG Spring 2012 Advanced Courses Magalog

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

PRG Spring 2012 Advanced Courses Magalog

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PATENT RESOURCES GROUP

ADVANCED PATENT L AW COURSES

ESTABLISHED PATENT PRACTITIONERS

Choose from 14 great advanced patent law courses. See page 3

Beautiful venue with many on-site activities. Great room rate!

THE ALMA MATER

40,000 PATENT ATTORNEYS

Register now at www.patentresources.com

About PRGs Loyalty Program

Hyatt Regency Coconut Point Resort & Spa

Post-Grant Patent Practice: Review, Reexamination, Reissue, and Supplemental Examination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

Art and Science of Patent Searching Patentability, Validity & Infringement

LANDON IP, INC. ALEXANDRIA, VIRGINIA

his course comprehensively teaches how to conduct a professional patent search.

Optional Patent Searching Workshop

Chemical Patent Practice

Comprehensive PCT Practice: How to Master Its Challenges

aspects of PCT matters.

Crafting & Drafting Winning Patents

Designing Around Valid U.S. Patents

Drafting Patent License Agreements

FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, GARRETT & DUNNER, LLP WASHINGTON, DC

Due Diligence Investigations

Federal Circuit Law (2010-2012)

INCLUDING COMMENTARY on the America Invents Act

Patent Infringement Litigation

Post-Grant Patent Practice: Review, Reexamination, Reissue, and Supplemental Examination

STOEL RIVES LLP SALT LAKE CITY, UT AND PORTLAND, OR

he battleground of patent validity is shifting from courts to the PTO.

DORSEY & WHITNEY LLP MINNEAPOLIS, MN

Don't Miss This Deal!

A Truly Amazing Venue

Hyatt Regency Coconut Point Resort & Spa

PATENT RESOURCES GROUP

Tel: 703-682-4860 Fax: 703-892-4510

Patentability, Validity & Infringement

Optional Patent Searching Workshop (combined course and workshop is $2,590)

Comprehensive PCT Practice: How to Due Diligence Investigations Patent Damages

Master Its Challenges

Prosecution, Hatch-Waxman & Litigation March 29-31, 2012 (Thurs-Sat)

Brochure Code: A12M1

1. __________ _________________________ STATE ID NO.

Reexamination, Reissue, and Supplemental Examination

Method and Other Software-Based Patents After Bilski and BMC

GNEW COURSE America Invents Act:

Charge $______________________ to: VISA MasterCard American Express

PRINT Name of Cardholder SIGNATURE of Cardholder

Corporate Customer Code (if applicable) ___________________

Credit Card # _______________________________ Exp. ________/__________

PRG is currently offering these courses* ON-SITE:

Contact SVP-Sales Ted Klekman at (916) 404-3908 to learn more.

PRG is Accessible Wherever You Are!

Register online now at www.patentresources.com

PATENT RESOURCES GROUP

Pre-sort Std. U.S. Postage PAID Western American Mailers

UNPARALLELED COURSES AT AN AMAZING VENUE!

PATENT RESOURCES GROUP

Be Prepared for the America Invents Act!

You might also like

1. _______________ STATE ID NO.

Credit Card # _____________________ Exp. /