the firm's post-grant practitioners are some of the most experienced in the country.

Technologies

Artificial Intelligence (AI)
Artificial Intelligence (AI)
Digital Health
Digital Health
Energy & Renewables
Energy & Renewables

Fast Facts

About Our

Law Firm

About Our Law Firm

Headquartered within steps of the USPTO with an affiliate office in Tokyo, Oblon is one of the largest law firms in the United States focused exclusively on intellectual property law.

Get to know our

History

Get to know our History

1968
Norman Oblon with Stanley Fisher and Marvin Spivak launched what was to become Oblon, McClelland, Maier & Neustadt, LLP, one of the nation's leading full-service intellectual property law firms.

Our Local and

Global Reach

Our Local and Global Reach

Outside the US, we service companies based in Japan, France, Germany, Italy, Saudi Arabia, and farther corners of the world. Our culturally aware attorneys speak many languages, including Japanese, French, German, Mandarin, Korean, Russian, Arabic, Farsi, Chinese.

A few of our

ACCOLADES

A few of our ACCOLADES

Oblon's professionals provide industry-leading IP legal services to many of the world's most admired innovators and brands.

OPPORTUNITIES FOR YOUR

Career

OPPORTUNITIES FOR YOUR Career

From the minute you walk through our doors, you'll become a valuable part of a team that fosters a culture of innovation, client service and collegiality.

A few ways to

GET In Touch

A few ways to GET In Touch
US Office

Telephone: 703-413-3000
Learn More +


Tokyo Office

Telephone: +81-3-6212-0550
Learn More +

Downloadable

Patent Forms

Downloadable Patent Forms

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued final rules implementing the inventor's oath or declaration provisions of the America Invents Act (AIA) on August 14, 2012.

Stay informed with

Our Blogs

Update & Reminder: Patent Term Adjustment Related to IDS Safe Harbor

  • July 5, 2019
  • Article

On November 9, 2018, I wrote about the USPTO’s release of interim procedures for patentees to request recalculation of the patent term adjustment with respect to information disclosure statements accompanied by a proper safe harbor statement under 37 CFR. 1.704(d) (https://www.oblon.com/publications/uspto-releases-interim-procedure-for-requesting-recalculation-of-patent-term-adjustment-related-to-the-ids-safe-harbor)

Although it is not often that patentees invest the time and money to verify the accuracy of the USPTO’s final patent term adjustment determination, it is important to always keep abreast of when and where errors may arise. This is particularly important in technology fields that are sensitive to patent term adjustment.

Recently, it has come to my attention that in several instances the USPTO has had a difficult time with proper implementation of these procedures, identification of a properly filed Form PTO/SB/133, and/or proper indexing of Form PTO/SB/133 in its PTA calculation process. From experience, a common cause of the error appears to be that Form PTO/SB/133 is not always pulled apart from other documents filed in the same electronic submission and is missed entirely.

However, a more important issue is that the certification statement under 37 C.F.R. §1.704(d) has two sub-parts which are separately identified in Form PTO/SB/133. In particular, the safe harbor statement applies when each item of information contained in the information disclosure statement:
(i) Was first cited in any communication from a patent office in a counterpart foreign or international application or from the USPTO, and this communication was not received by any individual designated in 37 CFR 1.56(c) more than thirty days prior to the filing of the information disclosure statement; or

(ii) is a communication that was issued by a patent office in a counterpart foreign or international application or by the USPTO, and this communication was not received by any individual designated in 37 CFR 1.56(c) more than thirty days prior to the filing of the information disclosure statement.
(see 37 CFR 1.704(d)(1)).
 
Patentees must be careful to ensure proper certification is made at the time of IDS filing as either of these statements or both may be needed.

Certification under 37 C.F.R. §1.704(d)(i) relates to “information… first cited in any communication.” This part of the certification statement relates to the references cited in the communication from a patent office in a counterpart foreign or international application or from the USPTO.

Certification under 37 C.F.R. §1.704(d)(ii) relates to “a communication that was issued by a patent office in a counterpart foreign or international application or by the USPTO.” This part of the certification statement relates to, for example, the search report or the office action.

For example, an Office Action is issued in a counterpart application containing first cited references. Within 30 days, the Office Action and the references are filed in an IDS. To be properly certified under 37 C.F.R. §1.704(d), both boxes in Form PTO/SB/133 must be checked, the first box for the references and the second box for the communication.

Failure to properly certify may lead to the loss of patent term adjustment even if Form PTO/SB/133 is filed. The USPTO is not terribly forgiving in situations where the certification could have been (and needed to be) made, but patentees forgot to check the right box(es). This is even true if the document is facially filed on a timely basis.