ACI's Maximizing Pharmaceutical
Patent Life Cycles Conference
PTE-PTA Boot Camp
October 3, 2011
Justin J. Oliver
Fitzpatrick, Cella, Harper & Scinto
975 F Street NW
Washington, D.C. 20004
FITZPATRICK, CELLA, HARPER & SCINTO © 2011
|
www.fitzpatrickcella.com
1
Introduction
 Patent Term Adjustment
– Adjustment of term of a patent based on delays by the PTO, which
delays may be offset by delays by the applicant
– Unlike PTE, PTA is not limited to a patent that covers a particular
product and will be granted by the PTO automatically
FITZPATRICK, CELLA, HARPER & SCINTO © 2011
|
www.fitzpatrickcella.com
2
Eligibility, Statute & Rules
 PTA Eligibility
– Applications filed on or after May 29, 2000
– Use PCT filing date for US national stage applications
 Statute
– 35 U.S.C. § 154(b)
 Rules
– 37 C.F.R. §§ 1.702-1.705
FITZPATRICK, CELLA, HARPER & SCINTO © 2011
|
www.fitzpatrickcella.com
3
Basics
 General Calculation of PTA
– (Days of PTO Delay) – (Days of Applicant Delay) = PTA
 But Applicant can only have days added (if the calculation
results in a number less than zero, then the PTA is zero days)
 No limitation on the total number of days that can be added
 Calculation is made for each patent
 Can be further extended by PTE
FITZPATRICK, CELLA, HARPER & SCINTO © 2011
|
www.fitzpatrickcella.com
4
Types of PTO Delays
 “A Delay”
– PTO fails to respond to applicant submission within set statutory
periods (“14-4-4-4”)
 “B Delay”
– PTO fails to issue patent within three years of filing
 “C Delay”
– Miscellaneous delays (e.g., interference)
FITZPATRICK, CELLA, HARPER & SCINTO © 2011
|
www.fitzpatrickcella.com
5
A Delay – Statute

35 U.S.C. §154(b)(1)(A)
–
Subject to the limitations under paragraph (2), if the issue of an original patent is delayed due to
the failure of the Patent and Trademark Office to(i) provide at least one of the notifications under section 132 of this title or a notice of
allowance under section 151 of this title not later than 14 months afterthe date on which an application was filed under section 111(a) of this title; or
the date on which an international application fulfilled the requirements of section 371 of
this title;
(ii) respond to a reply under section 132, or to an appeal taken under section 134, within
4 months after the date on which the reply was filed or the appeal was taken;
(iii) act on an application within 4 months after the date of a decision by the Board of Patent
Appeals and Interferences under section 134 or 135 or a decision by a Federal court
under section 141, 145, or 146 in a case in which allowable claims remain in the
application; or
(iv) issue a patent within 4 months after the date on which the issue fee was paid under
section 151 and all outstanding requirements were satisfied,
the term of the patent shall be extended 1 day for each day after the end of the period
specified in clause (i), (ii), (iii), or (iv), as the case may be, until the action described in
such clause is taken.
FITZPATRICK, CELLA, HARPER & SCINTO © 2011
|
www.fitzpatrickcella.com
6
A Delay – First Action
 USPTO fails to mail a first action within 14 months of:
– U.S. filing date
– Date national stage application fulfills requirements of § 371
 § 371(c) date
 First action may include
– Written restriction or election of species requirement
– Office Action (including Quayle)
– Notice of Allowability
– Requirement for information under § 1.105
FITZPATRICK, CELLA, HARPER & SCINTO © 2011
|
www.fitzpatrickcella.com
7
A Delay – Acting on Applicant Response
 USPTO fails to act within 4 months of applicant’s reply or appeal brief
– Includes replies to first or subsequent office actions
– An applicant reply to a final office action that does not put the
claims in condition for allowance does not start the clock (unless
RCE filed)
– Non-compliant appeal brief or response does not start the clock
FITZPATRICK, CELLA, HARPER & SCINTO © 2011
|
www.fitzpatrickcella.com
8
A Delay – Resuming Action After Board or Court Decision
 USPTO fails to act within 4 months of decision by Board or Federal
court that includes an allowable claim
– Appeals, interferences, civil actions
FITZPATRICK, CELLA, HARPER & SCINTO © 2011
|
www.fitzpatrickcella.com
9
A Delay – Issuing the Patent
 USPTO fails to issue patent within 4 months payment of issue fee
– All outstanding requirements must have been satisfied to start
clock
FITZPATRICK, CELLA, HARPER & SCINTO © 2011
|
www.fitzpatrickcella.com
10
A Delay – Calculation
 The period of delay:
– Begins on the day after the USPTO deadline (e.g., the day after
the 14 month deadline for issuing a first action)
– Ends on the day the USPTO issues the delayed paper
– Count all days in the period (including beginning and ending dates)
FITZPATRICK, CELLA, HARPER & SCINTO © 2011
|
www.fitzpatrickcella.com
11
B Delay – Statute

35 U.S.C. §154(b)(1)(B)
– Subject to the limitations under paragraph (2), if the issue of an original
patent is delayed due to the failure of the United States Patent and
Trademark Office to issue a patent within 3 years after the actual filing
date of the application in the United States, not including(i) any time consumed by continued examination of the application
requested by the applicant under section 132(b);
(ii) any time consumed by a proceeding under section 135(a), any time
consumed by the imposition of an order under section 181, or any
time consumed by appellate review by the Board of Patent Appeals
and Interferences or by a Federal court; or
(iii) any delay in the processing of the application by the United States
Patent and Trademark Office requested by the applicant except as
permitted by paragraph (3)(C),
the term of the patent shall be extended 1 day for each day after the end
of that 3-year period until the patent is issued.
FITZPATRICK, CELLA, HARPER & SCINTO © 2011
|
www.fitzpatrickcella.com
12
B Delay – Three Year Pendency
 Provides for adjustment of term based on failure to issue a patent
within 3 years after:
–
U.S. filing date
– date of national phase entry
 Excluding
– RCE filings – date of filing to issue date
– Interferences – same as calculation under C delay
– Secrecy Order – same as calculation under C delay
– Appellate review (Board or court) – similar to calculation under C
delay
– Delay requested by applicant – not specifically articulated
FITZPATRICK, CELLA, HARPER & SCINTO © 2011
|
www.fitzpatrickcella.com
13
B Delay – National Phase Entry
 National phase entry date
– § 371(b)
 30-month date, even if application is incomplete
– § 371(f)
 Must request § 371(f) start
 Application must be complete
 Note difference with determination in A Delays
– Statute says “actual filing date” in United States for B delay, as
opposed to “fulfilled requirements of section 371” for A delay
FITZPATRICK, CELLA, HARPER & SCINTO © 2011
|
www.fitzpatrickcella.com
14
B Delay – National Phase Entry
 Japan Tobacco
– PTO had measured three-year period from the completion of all
requirements under § 371(c) (e.g., signed declaration)
– This was challenged in Japan Tobacco and led to the PTO
correcting the way it calculates B delay
 Now the PTO measures it from the national stage
commencement under § 371(b) (30-month date) or § 371(f)
(express request for early processing)
FITZPATRICK, CELLA, HARPER & SCINTO © 2011
|
www.fitzpatrickcella.com
15
C Delays – Statute
 35 U.S.C. §154(b)(1)(C)
– Subject to the limitations under paragraph (2), if the issue of an
original patent is delayed due to(i) a proceeding under section 135(a);
(ii) the imposition of an order under section 181; or
(iii) appellate review by the Board of Patent Appeals and
Interferences or by a Federal court in a case in which the
patent was issued under a decision in the review reversing an
adverse determination of patentability,
the term of the patent shall be extended 1 day for each day of the
pendency of the proceeding, order, or review, as the case may
be.
FITZPATRICK, CELLA, HARPER & SCINTO © 2011
|
www.fitzpatrickcella.com
16
C Delay – Interference
 Adjustment Calculation for Interference:
– The number of days in the period beginning on the date the
interference was declared or redeclared to involve the application
and ending on the date that the interference was terminated with
respect to the application
– The number of days in the period beginning on the date
prosecution was suspended by the PTO due to an interference
proceeding not involving the application and ending on the date of
the termination of the suspension
FITZPATRICK, CELLA, HARPER & SCINTO © 2011
|
www.fitzpatrickcella.com
17
C Delay – Secrecy Order

Adjustment Calculation for Secrecy Order:
– The number of days the application was maintained in a sealed condition
under 35 U.S.C. § 181
– The number of days in the period beginning on the date of mailing of an
examiner's answer under § 41.39 in the application under secrecy order
and ending on the date the secrecy order was removed
– The number of days in the period beginning on the date applicant was
notified that an interference would be declared but for the secrecy order
and ending on the date the secrecy order was removed
– The number of days in the period beginning on the date of notification
under § 5.3(c) and ending on the date of mailing of the notice of allowance
under 35 U.S.C. § 151
FITZPATRICK, CELLA, HARPER & SCINTO © 2011
|
www.fitzpatrickcella.com
18
C Delay – Appellate Review
 Adjustment Calculation for Appeals:
– The number of days in the period beginning on the date on which a
notice of appeal to the Board was filed and ending on the date of a
final decision in favor of the applicant by the Board or by a Federal
court (appeal or civil action)
 Does not count if you file RCE after successful appeal before
next action
 Slightly different than corresponding B delay calculation
• B delay refers to decision, action or notice of allowance
• This allows PTO to exclude time consumed by an appeal
that does not result in a decision (e.g., the Examiner
decides to withdraw the rejection on appeal)
FITZPATRICK, CELLA, HARPER & SCINTO © 2011
|
www.fitzpatrickcella.com
19
Overlap of Delays - Statute
 35 U.S.C. §154(b)(2)(A)
– To the extent that periods of delay attributable to grounds specified
in paragraph (1) overlap, the period of any adjustment granted
under this subsection shall not exceed the actual number of days
the issuance of the patent was delayed.
FITZPATRICK, CELLA, HARPER & SCINTO © 2011
|
www.fitzpatrickcella.com
20
Overlap of Delays – Calculation
 What is an “overlap”?
– Wyeth v. Dudas
 PTO took the position that “overlap” occurred based on the
mere existence of A and B delays, even if those delays
occurred on different calendar days
 Court held that “overlap” occurs when different delays occur on
same calendar day
FITZPATRICK, CELLA, HARPER & SCINTO © 2011
|
www.fitzpatrickcella.com
21
Overlap of Delays – Calculation
(B) Delay
Filing
Date
PTO
Deadline
PTO
Action
3 Year
Deadline
(A) Delay – No overlap
FITZPATRICK, CELLA, HARPER & SCINTO © 2011
PTO
Deadline
PTO Action;
Issuance
(A) Delay – Overlap
|
www.fitzpatrickcella.com
22
Reduction of PTA – Statute

35 U.S.C. §154(b)(2)(B)-(C)
–
(B) No patent the term of which has been disclaimed beyond a specified date may
be adjusted under this section beyond the expiration date specified in the
disclaimer.
–
(C) REDUCTION OF PERIOD OF ADJUSTMENT
(i) The period of adjustment of the term of a patent under paragraph (1) shall be
reduced by a period equal to the period of time during which the applicant
failed to engage in reasonable efforts to conclude prosecution of the
application.
(ii) With respect to adjustments to patent term made under the authority of
paragraph (1)(B), an applicant shall be deemed to have failed to engage in
reasonable efforts to conclude processing or examination of an application for
the cumulative total of any periods of time in excess of 3 months that are taken
to respond to a notice from the Office making any rejection, objection,
argument, or other request, measuring such 3-month period from the date the
notice was given or mailed to the applicant.
(iii) The Director shall prescribe regulations establishing the circumstances that
constitute a failure of an applicant to engage in reasonable efforts to conclude
processing or examination of an application.
FITZPATRICK, CELLA, HARPER & SCINTO © 2011
|
www.fitzpatrickcella.com
23
Reduction of PTA – Rules

37 C.F.R § 1.704(a) – Generally
–

37 C.F.R. § 1.704(b) – Concerning Replies
–

PTA shall be reduced by a period equal to the period of time during which the
applicant failed to engage in reasonable efforts to conclude prosecution of the
application
Failure to reply to notice/action making any rejection, objection, argument or other
request within 3 months of mailing (but option for reinstatement)

Period set for reply in notice/action has no effect on 3-month period

PTO does not yet count the first business day after weekend or holiday as
within 3 months (but see Arqule, Inc. v. Kappos)

PTO uses actual date of receipt or express mailing date, not certificate of
mailing date or facsimile transmission date
37 C.F.R. § 1.704(c) – Miscellaneous
–
Specific circumstances that constitute failure of applicant to engage in reasonable
efforts
FITZPATRICK, CELLA, HARPER & SCINTO © 2011
|
www.fitzpatrickcella.com
24
Reduction of PTA – Specific Circumstances
 Applicant requests suspension of action (§ 1.704(c)(1))
 Deferral of issuance of patent under § 1.314 (§ 1.704(c)(2))
– Period ends when patent issues
 Abandonment of application or late payment of issue fee (§
1.704(c)(3))
– Period ends at date decision to revive is mailed, or 4 months after
grantable petition is filed
 Failure to file a petition to withdraw holding of abandonment or to
revive an application within two months of notice (§ 1.704(c)(4))
– Period ends with filing of petition
FITZPATRICK, CELLA, HARPER & SCINTO © 2011
|
www.fitzpatrickcella.com
25
Reduction of PTA – Specific Circumstances

Conversion of provisional application into nonprovisional (§ 1.704(c)(5))
– Period is provisional filing date until request for conversion

Submission of preliminary amendment or other preliminary paper (e.g., IDS)
less than one month before mailing of (1) office action or (2) notice of
allowance, which requires mailing of supplemental action or notice (§
1.704(c)(6))
– Period is lesser of (1) date of mailing of first action/notice and ending on
mailing of supplemental action/notice or (2) 4 months

Submission of reply having an omission (§ 1.704(c)(7))
– Period begins on day after filing of paper and ends on date corrected reply
is filed

Submission of supplemental reply or other paper (IDS) (§ 1.704(c)(8))
– Period begins the day after the initial reply and ends with suppl. filing
FITZPATRICK, CELLA, HARPER & SCINTO © 2011
|
www.fitzpatrickcella.com
26
Reduction of PTA – Specific Circumstances

Submission of Amendment or other paper after a decision by the Board (except
new ground of rejection), or Federal court less than 1 month before Office
Action or allowance that requires supplement action or paper (§ 1.704(c)(9))
– Period is lesser of (1) day after mailing of action/notice and ending on date
of mailing of new supplemental action/notice, or (2) 4 months

Submission of 312 amendment or other paper (e.g., IDS) after notice of
allowance was given or mailed (§ 1.704(c)(10))
– Period is lesser of (1) day of filing of 312 amendment/other paper through
mailing of notice in response to such paper, or (2) 4 months

Filing of a continuing application (§ 1.704(c)(11))
– Wipes out calculation and starts fresh
FITZPATRICK, CELLA, HARPER & SCINTO © 2011
|
www.fitzpatrickcella.com
27
Reduction of PTA – Specific Circumstances
 Information Disclosure Statement
– Will not be considered failure to engage in reasonable efforts to
conclude prosecution if:
 Accompanied by statement that each item of information was
first cited in any communication from a foreign patent office in
a counterpart application; and
 The communication was not received by any individual
designated in § 1.56(c) more than 30 days prior to the filing of
the IDS
• 56(c) includes applicants, attorneys, and “every other
person who is substantively involved in the preparation and
prosecution …”
FITZPATRICK, CELLA, HARPER & SCINTO © 2011
|
www.fitzpatrickcella.com
28
Correction of PTA – During Prosecution
 Applicant cannot request correction of PTA until the first calculation
provided with Notice of Allowance
 However, the entries in PAIR made throughout prosecution will be used
by the PTO to make the PTA calculation
– To avoid problems, during prosecution an applicant should ensure
that the entries in PAIR are correct
– Errors in PAIR can be corrected before the PTA calculation by
calling the Examiner or Tech Center
FITZPATRICK, CELLA, HARPER & SCINTO © 2011
|
www.fitzpatrickcella.com
29
Correction of PTA – At Allowance

Correcting PTA Calculation provided with Notice of Allowance
– File a request for reconsideration no later than payment of issue fee (A
and C delays)

Request should include:
• Statement of facts
» Correct term and basis for adjustment
» Relevant dates
» Whether a Terminal Disclaimer is involved
» Any circumstances constituting failure to engage in
reasonable efforts to conclude prosecution (or statement that
there were no such circumstances)
• fee
FITZPATRICK, CELLA, HARPER & SCINTO © 2011
|
www.fitzpatrickcella.com
30
Correction of PTA – Reinstatement
 Under 37 C.F.R. § 1.705(c), an applicant may apply for reinstatement
of all or part of reductions in PTA due to a failure to respond to a PTO
rejection, objection, argument, or other request within 3 months
– Requirements:
 Showing that, in spite of all due care, applicant was unable to
respond within 3 months
 Fee
– Example – Time for scientific testing to rebut rejection
FITZPATRICK, CELLA, HARPER & SCINTO © 2011
|
www.fitzpatrickcella.com
31
Correction of PTA – At Issuance
 Correcting PTA Calculation listed on issued patent
– File a request for reconsideration no later than 2 months after issue
date
 Applies to errors that could not have been corrected at
allowance
 Requirements for the request are similar to those at allowance
FITZPATRICK, CELLA, HARPER & SCINTO © 2011
|
www.fitzpatrickcella.com
32
Correction of PTA – In Court
 Correcting PTA through an action in District Court
– Now Eastern District of Virginia (America Invents Act)
– File civil action no later than 180 days after patent grant
– Option available after administrative remedies have been
exhausted (i.e., file request in PTO first)
– 180 days measure regardless of whether applicant has yet
received a response to any request filed with PTO
FITZPATRICK, CELLA, HARPER & SCINTO © 2011
|
www.fitzpatrickcella.com
33
Correction of PTA – In Court
 Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Kappos
– Is 180 day rule absolute?
 Argues that the 180-day clock should not run until agency
action is resolved, not when patent is issued
• See ICC v. Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers, 482 U.S.
270 (1987) (a statutory period for seeking judicial review of
an administrative decision does not begin to run until after
any timely requests for administrative reconsideration have
been resolved)
 Since most motions for reconsideration of PTA filed by
Applicants are not resolved by the PTO until many months
after they are filed, BMS argues that the 180-day clock should
be tolled until final agency action is received from the PTO
FITZPATRICK, CELLA, HARPER & SCINTO © 2011
|
www.fitzpatrickcella.com
34
Correction of PTA – In Court
 Novartis v. Kappos
– Based on the Wyeth decision, the PTO implemented interim
procedures to correct Wyeth-type errors for patents that issued
after September 1, 2009
– Novartis is challenging the interim procedures and arguing that it
should be permitted to correct Wyeth-type mistakes for cases that
issued on or before September 1, 2009
– Awaiting decision on summary judgment motions
FITZPATRICK, CELLA, HARPER & SCINTO © 2011
|
www.fitzpatrickcella.com
35
Practice Tips
 Reply to all actions within 3 months
– File response on the business day prior to weekend or holiday (for
now)
– If you need to take an extension, do not wait until next due date to
file
 File any preliminary amendments or replacement drawings as early as
possible
 Ask foreign associates to provide search reports within 30 days (Rule
56(c) person?)
 Don’t convert provisional applications
FITZPATRICK, CELLA, HARPER & SCINTO © 2011
|
www.fitzpatrickcella.com
36
Practice Tips
 File all responses at 3 month date?
– Restrictions?
– Quayle actions?
 Request restriction requirements in writing? (A vs. B delay)
 Failure to engage in reasonable efforts to conclude prosecution?
FITZPATRICK, CELLA, HARPER & SCINTO © 2011
|
www.fitzpatrickcella.com
37
Practice Tips
 What if your calculation indicates that the PTO error was in favor of the
applicant?
– Prior practice – letter or Cert. of Correction
 No longer proper
– Current practice
 Not required to request correction
 But, if you want it corrected, you must
• use normal procedure (with the fee)
• Disclaim improper term
FITZPATRICK, CELLA, HARPER & SCINTO © 2011
|
www.fitzpatrickcella.com
38
 6914813
FITZPATRICK, CELLA, HARPER & SCINTO © 2011
|
www.fitzpatrickcella.com
39
NEW YORK
1290 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10104-3800
212.218.2100
WASHINGTON
975 F Street, NW
Washington, DC 20004-1462
202.530.1010
CALIFORNIA
650 Town Center Drive, Suite 1600
Costa Mesa, CA 92626-7130
714.540.8700
FITZPATRICK, CELLA, HARPER & SCINTO © 2011
|
www.fitzpatrickcella.com
40