Insights: Alerts Key Takeaways: Software Patent Prosecution Requires Data-Based Strategies Due to Patent Office Inconsistencies
Kilpatrick Townsend attorneys Kate Gaudry, Ph.D. and Thomas D. Franklin recently presented at the Practising Law Institute’s 11th Annual Patent Law Institute regarding “Software/EE: Are We There, Yet?”.
Key Takeaways from the presentation include:
- Patent-Eligibility Test – Poorly Suited for Consistency
- Almost all software innovations are vulnerable to an abstract idea accusation under patent eligibility guidelines. For example, patent office examination guidelines indicate that a claim “comparing new and stored information using rules to identify options” is abstract.
- Patent office instructions require a deep analysis of case law, although very few examiners are lawyers.
- “Significantly more” qualification is ill-defined.
- Post-Alice, Allowance Rates Vary
- Allowance prospects in business-method art units where eligibility rejections are common are an order of magnitude lower than in other areas with similar technology.
- Recently, business-method allowance rates have been inching higher (coinciding with management personnel change).
- Crafting Strategies in View of Examiner and Art Unit Variability Improve Prosecution Results and Costs
- There is no one-size-fits-all prosecution strategy, as examination tendencies vary
across art units and over time.
- Examiner statistics predict post-amendment allowance prospects.
- Art unit allowance rates predict prospects of pre-decision allowances in appeal cycle.
- Empirical data is useful to determine whether (and how) to file an amendment, appeal,
Kilpatrick Townsend Partner Thomas D. Franklin focuses his practice on aggressive patent prosecution, strategic patent management and pre-litigation strategies with twenty years of patent experience. Kilpatrick Townsend Attorney Kate Gaudry, Ph.D. uses data-based approaches to identify portfolio- and application-level prosecution strategies for individual clients. Her goal is to provide clients with client-specific advice on how to intelligently and deliberately select drafting and prosecution strategies to achieve their patent goals. Dr. Gaudry’s technical background is in software, computer systems and quantitative biology.
While we are pleased to have you contact us by telephone, surface mail, electronic mail, or by facsimile transmission, contacting Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP or any of its attorneys does not create an attorney-client relationship. The formation of an attorney-client relationship requires consideration of multiple factors, including possible conflicts of interest. An attorney-client relationship is formed only when both you and the Firm have agreed to proceed with a defined engagement.
DO NOT CONVEY TO US ANY INFORMATION YOU REGARD AS CONFIDENTIAL UNTIL A FORMAL CLIENT-ATTORNEY RELATIONSHIP HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED.
If you do convey information, you recognize that we may review and disclose the information, and you agree that even if you regard the information as highly confidential and even if it is transmitted in a good faith effort to retain us, such a review does not preclude us from representing another client directly adverse to you, even in a matter where that information could be used against you.