Securities Attorney for Going Public Transactions

Securities Lawyer Blog

knowledge itself is power

The USPTO’s Proposed Terminal Disclaimer Rule Change: It’s Radical, But Is It Legal?

On May 10, 2024, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) that could significantly alter the landscape for filing terminal disclaimers in patent applications. These proposed changes, if implemented, could potentially invalidate entire patent families if even one claim in one patent within the family is found invalid over prior art. This proposal has sparked considerable concern among stakeholders. Here, we delve into why these changes are significant and the potential ramifications for patent owners.

Current State of Terminal Disclaimers

Under the existing rules, when a patent applicant files a terminal disclaimer, they agree to disclaim any term extending beyond the term of a commonly owned patent or application with claims deemed close in scope to those in the disclaimed patent or application. The enforceability of the disclaimed patent is contingent upon it remaining commonly owned with the properties subject to the terminal disclaimer.

Currently, applicants often file terminal disclaimers without significant hesitation, partly because the Federal Circuit has ruled that such filings do not necessarily admit to patentable indistinctness or obviousness. This means that invalidating a claim in one of the patents connected by a terminal disclaimer does not automatically invalidate claims in the other patent.

Proposed Changes and Potential Impact

The proposed rules aim to change this landscape dramatically. If adopted, the rules would require applicants to agree that if any claim of the patent to which a terminal disclaimer is applied is invalidated by prior art, the patent with the terminal disclaimer would also be unenforceable.

Key Implications:

  1. Invalidation Risks: The new rules mean that if a single claim in one patent tied by a terminal disclaimer is invalidated, it could render the entire patent family unenforceable. This is a significant shift from the current practice and could deter applicants from using terminal disclaimers.

  2. Increased Litigation Complexity: Accused infringers would have a stronger position, as invalidating a single claim could invalidate an entire suite of related patents. This could simplify post-grant challenges but increase the stakes significantly for patent owners.

  3. Policy Rationale: The USPTO asserts that the changes are meant to promote competition by reducing the costs of challenging groups of patents tied by terminal disclaimers, thereby lowering market entry barriers and consumer costs. However, the associated increase in terminal disclaimer fees and the potential for protracted application pendency due to more frequent challenges to terminal disclaimer requirements could counteract these benefits.

Practical Considerations for Patent Owners

Given the proposed rules, patent applicants will need to reconsider their filing strategies to minimize the risk of terminal disclaimers:

  1. Claim Strategy Adjustments: Applicants may need to ensure that claims in continuation applications are sufficiently distinct from those in parent applications to avoid nonstatutory double patenting rejections.

  2. Combining Claims: One approach could be to combine potentially conflicting claims into a single application or separate patentably distinct claims into different applications.

  3. Challenging Rejections: More applicants may opt to argue against nonstatutory double patenting rejections instead of filing terminal disclaimers.

  4. Reissue Applications: Another strategy could involve filing reissue applications to include cancelled conflicting claims from an original application, thereby avoiding terminal disclaimers.

Conclusion

The proposed rule changes by the USPTO regarding terminal disclaimers could significantly impact patent strategy and litigation. While the purported goal is to promote competition and reduce litigation costs, the reality for patent owners could be more complex and costly. Patent owners will need to adopt new strategies to navigate these changes, potentially involving more detailed claim drafting and increased challenges to terminal disclaimer requirements.

Stakeholders have voiced significant concerns, and it remains to be seen how these proposed changes will ultimately shape the patent landscape. Patent owners should stay informed and consult with their legal advisors to prepare for these potential shifts in USPTO policy.

Gayatri Gupta