Patent reform has arrived: what will be its impact on those touchstones of patentability, prior art and obviousness? 102 was already a complicated concept for patent practitioners, having undergone evolving interpretations in the PTO and CAFC. How will the AIA now complicate matters further? What aspects of current 102 understanding carry over to new 102? How does the concept of “prior art” and circumstance collide in the 21st century? How does prior art on the web impact the practice? What is truly enabled? This program will allow you to obtain an essential working understanding of this newly complicated statute, including recent interpretations, case law, explore and understand the statutory revisions. Meanwhile, obviousness, the most common reason any application is rejected or patent held invalid, is continuing to evolve as a result of
KSR already 6 years old). Explore 103 from inside and outside the PTO as both the CAFC and PTO try to shoehorn their past decisions into a
KSR pigeonhole!
Lecture Topics [Total time 06:17:50]
Segments with an asterisk (*) are available only with the purchase of the entire program.
- Overview and the Dual System (Back File and New Filings) of Prior Art & Rules (March 16, 2013)* [00:10:30]
John M. White
- Post AIA Section 102: The Complete Breakdown of 102 (a)-(d) [01:44:50]
Leonard Richard Svensson, Annemarie Hassett
- Section 103: Inside the PTO KSR Guidelines [01:03:30]
Michael W. O'Neill
- Old 102: is it really gone? And, Which definitions and Practices Carry Over to New 102? [01:04:37]
Aaron Bernstein, Benjamin C. Hsing
- 35 USC 103 and CAFC [00:55:58]
Rebecca Goldman Rudich
- The Concept of Old 102(e) Recast as New 102 (a)(2) as Implemented by New 102(d): Effects of Priority Under 119, 120, 121, 365 [01:18:25]
John M. White, Robert J. Spar
The purchase price of this Web Program includes the following articles from the Course Handbook available online:
- Winning the Battle and the War—Obtaining Priority Under the First-To-File System While Minimizing the Risk of Invalidity
Annemarie Hassett
- Post AIA Section 102: The Complete Breakdown of 102 (a)-(d)
Leonard Richard Svensson
- “Well, Isn’t That About as Obvious as it Comes?”
Michael W. O'Neill
- 35 USC 102(f) and 102(g) and the 103(c) Exception and Treatment Under the America Invents Act
Aaron Bernstein, Benjamin C. Hsing
- KSR, Obviousness and the Federal Circuit in 2012
Rebecca Goldman Rudich
- Prior 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) Coexists with New AIA § 102(a)(2) & (d): Benefit & Priority Effects Under 35 USC §§ 119, 120, 121 and 365
Robert J. Spar
- Flowcharts for 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) Dates: Apply to All Applications and Patents, Whenever Filed (November, 2002)
Robert J. Spar
Presentation Material
- Post AIA Section 102: The Complete Breakdown of 102 (a)-(d)
Annemarie Hassett
- Post AIA Section 102: The Complete Breakdown of 102 (a) - (d)
Leonard Richard Svensson
- Section 103: Inside the PTO KSR Guidelines
Michael W. O'Neill
- Old 102: Is it really gone? And, Which Definitions and Practices Carry Over to New 102?
Aaron Bernstein
- Old 102: Is it really gone? - Prior Art Under 35 U.S.C. § 102(g)
Benjamin C. Hsing
- 35 USC 103 and the CAFC
Rebecca Goldman Rudich
- The Concept of Old 102(3) Recast as New 102 (a)(2) as Implemented by New 102(d): Effects of Priority Under 119, 120, 121, 365
Robert J. Spar
PLI makes every effort to accredit its On-Demand Web Programs and Segments. Please check the CLE Calculator above for CLE information specific to your state.
On-Demand Web Programs and Segments are approved in:
Alabama1, Alaska, California, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho*, Illinois , Iowa2*, Kansas, Kentucky*, Louisiana, Maine*, Mississippi, Missouri3, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire4, New Jersey, New Mexico5, New York6, North Carolina7, North Dakota, Ohio8, Oklahoma9, Oregon*, Pennsylvania10, Rhode Island11, South Carolina, Tennessee12, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia13, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin14 and Wyoming*.
Iowa, Mississippi, Oklahoma, and Wisconsin DO NOT approve Audio Only On-Demand Web Programs.
Minnesota approves live webcasts ONLY
Please Note: The State Bar of Arizona does not approve or accredit CLE activities for the Mandatory Continuing Legal Education requirement. PLI programs may qualify for credit based on the requirements outlined in the MCLE Regulations and Ariz. R. Sup. Ct. Rule 45.
*PLI will apply for credit upon request. Louisiana and New Hampshire: PLI will apply for credit upon request for audio-only on-demand web programs.
1Alabama: Approval of all web based programs is limited to a maximum of 6.0 credits.
2Iowa: The approval is for one year from recorded date. Does not approve of Audio-only On-Demand Webcasts.
3Missouri: On-demand web programs are restricted to six hours of self-study credit per year. Self-study may not be used to satisfy the ethics requirements. Self-study can not be used for carryover credit.
4New Hamphsire: The approval is for three years from recorded date.
5New Mexico: On-Demand web programs are restricted to 4.0 self-study credits per year.
6New York: Newly admitted attorneys may not take non-traditional course formats such as on-demand Web Programs or live Webcasts for CLE credit. Newly admitted attorneys not practicing law in the United States, however, may earn 12 transitional credits in non-traditional formats.
7North Carolina: A maximum of 4 credits per reporting period may be earned by participating in on-demand web programs.
8Ohio: To confirm that the web program has been approved, please refer to the list of Ohio’s Approved Self Study Activities at http://www.sconet.state.oh.us. Online programs are considered self-study. Ohio attorneys have a 6 credit self-study limit per compliance period. The Ohio CLE Board states that attorneys must have a 100% success rate in clicking on timestamps to receive ANY CLE credit for an online program.
9Oklahoma: Up to 6 credits may be earned each year through computer-based or technology-based legal education programs.
10Pennsylvania: PA attorneys may only receive a maximum of four (4) hours of distance learning credit per compliance period. All distance learning programs must be a minimum of 1 full hour.
11Rhode Island: Audio Only On-Demand Web Programs are not approved for credit. On-Demand Web Programs must have an audio and video component.
12Tennessee: The approval is for the calendar year in which the live program was presented.
13Virginia: All distance learning courses are to be done in an educational setting, free from distractions.
14Wisconsin: Ethics credit is not allowed. The ethics portion of the program will be approved for general credit. There is a 10 credit limit for on-demand web programs during every 2-year reporting period. Does not approve of Audio-only On-Demand Webcasts.
Running time and CLE credit hours are not necessarily the same. Please be aware that many states do not permit credit for luncheon and keynote speakers.
If you have already received credit for attending some or the entire program, please be aware that state administrators do not permit you to accrue additional credit for repeat viewing even if an additional credit certificate is subsequently issued.
Note that some states limit the number of credit hours attorneys may claim for online CLE activities, and state rules vary with regard to whether online CLE activities qualify for participatory or self-study credits. For more information, call Customer Service (800) 260-4PLI (4754) or e-mail info@pli.edu.