Methods for patent invalidation
Technology

Methods for patent invalidation

patent invalidation

A patent is a territorial right granted by the territorial government to an inventor to prevent others from making, using, offering for sale or selling an invention throughout the territory or importing the invention into the territory for a limited time in exchange for the invention. . it must be novel, eg, not fully described in any single prior art reference. (2) The invention must not be obvious for public disclosure of the invention.

Patentability criteria:
The most important criterion for the granting of a patent application for an invention is that the invention must be new, that is, 1) The invention must be novel, for example, not disclosed in any of the prior art references and 2) The invention must not be obvious, for example, the invention must not be obvious to any person skilled in the art at the date of filing of the invention as a patent application. Another criterion for granting the patent is the industrial use of the invention.

If a granted patent is blocking any market-ready product, then the strategy of the company whose product is market-ready is to invalidate the patent. The invalidation of the granted patent is pursued before the judicial courts. According to certain rules of the patent office, patent invalidation cases can be brought by “Any interested person”. “Any interested person” can be defined as a person who conducts or promotes research in the same field to which the invention relates. The patent can be invalidated for various reasons.

These causes/strategies for the nullity of a patent that are followed by lawyers in court are mentioned below:

1) The invention claimed in the patent is not new.
The claimed invention is present in the state of the art like any published document. If the claimed invention lacks novelty with respect to previously disclosed knowledge or prior use it may invalidate the patent.

2) The object of the patent claim is not an invention.
The patent offices of different countries have patent laws, which define the patentable object. An invention that does not meet the criteria of patentable subject matter may be invalidated on the basis that the subject matter of the patent claim is not an invention under the patent law of that country.

3) The patent was illicitly obtained by a person other than the owner.
The patent applicants must be the inventors who have worked on the invention. Insufficient disclosure of details of inventors or disclosure of a person as an inventor who is erroneously listed as an inventor may form the basis for invalidation of the patent. The problem here is that a patent can be invalidated or revoked in many jurisdictions, if the patent applicant or inventor is not the true and first inventor.

4) Insufficient disclosure of the invention
It is the duty of inventors to disclose all material information related to the invention, including the best mode of carrying out the invention, all material art known to the inventor, and any information that may make the invention unpatentable, such as a use public or published description of the invention more than one year before the filing date of the patent application. Any deliberate attempt at disclosure or insufficient description of information related to the invention may be grounds for invalidation of the patent. Another basis for patent invalidation is the false suggestion or representation of any fact or statement made in connection with the grantor of the patent.

5) Obvious
The claimed invention is obvious to any person skilled in the art and does not imply any inventive activity, it can be invalidated based on the evidence. If a person skilled in the art (appointed by the court) finds that the claimed invention is self-evident and readily discoverable on the priority date of the claimed invention, the patent claim may be invalidated on the grounds of obviousness.

6) The claims included in the patent are not fully supported by the description provided.

7) Failure to disclose information regarding foreign applications.

8) First to archive / First to invent
The US patent laws follow the first-to-invent criteria of patentability, while the patent laws of other countries follow the first-to-file concept. In the US, patent invalidation can be on a first-invent basis, where preference is given to whichever inventor first invented the invention.

9) The patent owner did not act diligently in continuing with the patent application process (patent grace period)

In the US and Japan, a grace period of 6 to 12 months is allowed for filing a patent application after the publication of the patented idea or device. If the inventor publishes the invention, an application can still be validly filed that will be considered novel despite the publication, as long as the filing is made during the grace period following publication. The filing of the patent application after the expiration of the grace period allowed by the respective patent offices may be grounds for invalidation of the granted patent.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *