Inter Partes Review的新聞與心得整理

Rackspace fights patent troll in the name of every mobile developer everywhere (Gigaom.com)

Rackspace 法務長的部落格文章 (Rackspace.com) 
Rackspace向USPTO請求Inter Partes Review的請求書

America Invents Act全文 (Inter Partes Review在Chapter 31)


繼之前對Parallel Iron這個patent troll起訴違反合約之後，Rackspace這次又針對另一個patent troll (Rotatable Technologies LLC) 的專利，在USPTO請求Inter Partes Review，嘗試讓其專利無效。

以下先評論一下這則新聞，再針對Inter Partes Review與訴訟的相關性，作個簡單的整理，供大家批評指教。

1.

Rotatable Technologies的作法是典型的patent troll的作法：它開的和解金額其實很低，只有75,000美金，而且如果願意談，還有可能更低。不論是跟它訴訟，或是去USPTO請求Inter Partes Review，成本都會比跟它和解高。

很多人會因此願意花錢消災了事，但也有公司不願意就範，寧可花更多錢，也不願意付錢給patent troll。Rackspace就是後者。它為什麼這樣作呢？

其法務長在部落格上說，我們這樣作不是只為了自己，我們是為了所有的app開發者而戰：

We know this IPR will cost us more than the $75,000 that Rotatable wanted to extort from us. But we are not just fighting for us; we are fighting for all the app developers who are also in the line of fire. As the noted software engineer and blogger Joel Spolsky wrote, “Life is a bit hard sometimes, and sometimes you have to step up and fight fights that you never signed up for.”

我想，Rackspace絕對不會說，他們是因為對客戶負擔保義務才這樣作。幫客戶付律師費太貴了，還不如直接把專利拔掉，比較便宜。

他們也絕不會說，他是因為自己被告才這樣作。如果是被告，Inter Partes Review依法必須在被訴專利侵權後的一年內提出才行。所以他才趕快提，不然一年後就沒的提了。

上面這些說法都不熱血。喊說 "我們是為了所有的app開發者而戰！" 這樣才熱血，才對公司形象有幫助，這才重要。

所以同一件事，重點是你怎麼講故事給人家聽。背後真正的算計，就別提了吧。當然，Rackspace的競爭對手應該也會很感動。有人花錢幫忙把專利無效，他們只要等就好，多棒。

對了，同一個patent troll也有告Acer跟Asus (起訴狀在這)。這兩家台灣品牌龍頭要不要也考慮一下，講個故事提升一下品牌形象呢？

2.

Inter Partes Review是新的制度。話不多說，以下簡單整理幾個這個制度跟訴訟之間相關性的重點，供大家參考。主要的內容都在第315條。

(1) Inter Partes Review不能在專利侵權的訴狀送達的一年之後才提。

這個期限是315(b)的規定：

(b) PATENT OWNER’S ACTION.—An inter partes review may not be instituted if the petition requesting the proceeding is filed more than 1 year after the date on which the petitioner, real party in interest, or privy of the petitioner is served with a complaint alleging infringement of the patent. The time limitation set forth in the preceding sentence shall not apply to a request for joinder under subsection (c).

換句話說，如果被告專利侵權，想要提 Inter Partes Review，一定要記得要在訴狀送達後的一年之內提。這個期限千萬要記得。

(2) 如果已經在法院提了專利無效之訴，那就不能提Inter Partes Review了。

這是315(a)(1)的規定：

(1) INTER PARTES REVIEW BARRED BY CIVIL ACTION.—An inter partes review may not be instituted if, before the date on which the petition for such a review is filed, the petitioner or real party in interest filed a civil action challenging the validity of a claim of the patent.

所以，如果收到專利權人的警告函，想要主動在法院對專利權人提Declaratory Judgment確認專利無效，挑戰專利有效性的話，可能要先想一下了。提了以後就不能去USPTO提成本比較低的Inter Partes Review了。

應該有人會想到，可是如果我是先被告專利侵權，在訴訟裡被迫反訴專利無效，難道也不能再去USPTO提Inter Partes Review了嗎？放心，還是可以的。315(a)(3)說，挑戰專利有效性的反訴不是本項的 "挑戰專利有效性的民事訴訟"：

(3) TREATMENT OF COUNTERCLAIM.—A counterclaim challenging the validity of a claim of a patent does not constitute a civil action challenging the validity of a claim of a patent for purposes of this subsection.

(3) 先提Inter Partes Review再提挑戰專利有效性的民事訴訟，後者會自動暫停。

這是315(a)(2)的規定：

(2) STAY OF CIVIL ACTION.—If the petitioner or real party in interest files a civil action challenging the validity of a claim of the patent on or after the date on which the petitioner files a petition for inter partes review of the patent, that civil action shall be automatically stayed until either—

    (A) the patent owner moves the court to lift the stay;

    (B) the patent owner files a civil action or counterclaim alleging that the petitioner or real party in interest has infringed the patent; or

    (C) the petitioner or real party in interest moves the court to dismiss the civil action.

暫停的例外狀況，是 (A) 專利權人自己不想暫停，(B) 專利權人起訴或反訴專利侵權，或是 (C) 申請Inter Partes Review的人自己請求撤銷訴訟。這些狀況都會讓後面這個訴訟不會自動暫停。

(4) Inter Partes Review的一事不再理及於法院與ITC

這是315(e) 的規定：

(e) ESTOPPEL.—

(1) PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE OFFICE.—The petitioner in an inter partes review of a claim in a patent under this chapter that results in a final written decision under section 318(a), or the real party in interest or privy of the petitioner, may not request or maintain a proceeding before the Office with respect to that claim on any ground that the petitioner raised or reasonably could have raised during that inter partes review.

(2) CIVIL ACTIONS AND OTHER PROCEEDINGS.—The petitioner in an inter partes review of a claim in a patent under this chapter that results in a final written decision under section 318(a), or the real party in interest or privy of the petitioner, may not assert either in a civil action arising in whole or in part under section 1338 of title 28 or in a proceeding before the International Trade Commission under section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 that the claim is invalid on any ground that the petitioner raised or reasonably could have raised during that inter partes review.

也就是說，在Patent Trial and Appeal Board關於Inter Partes Review的最終書面決定出來之後，相同的專利無效理由，以及 "合理應該可以提出" 的專利無效理由，就都不能在法院跟ITC主張了。(當然，Patent Trial and Appeal Board的最終書面決定本身還是可以上訴的。)

======

基於以上四點，再整理如下：

如果是收到專利侵權警告函：

1. 趕快作專利無效檢索，並確定全部的無效理由。
   (注意Inter Partes Review的一事不再理，包括 "合理應該可以提出"的理由，及於法院與ITC。)
2. 先提Inter Partes Review。
   (先提Declaratory Judgment會不能提Inter Partes Review。)
3. 如果想搶管轄法院，再提Declaratory Judgment確認專利無效。
   (要在Inter Partes Review的最終書面決定作出之前提。)
4. Declaratory Judgment會自動stay。
   (不過別擔心，一旦專利權人起訴或反訴侵權，就不會自動stay了。)

如果是專利侵權訴狀送達：

1. 趕快作專利無效檢索，並確定全部的無效理由。
   (注意Inter Partes Review的一事不再理，包括 "合理應該可以提出"的理由，及於法院與ITC。)
2. 放心提專利無效的反訴。這不會讓你不能提 Inter Partes Review。
3. 要提 Inter Partes Review要在一年之內提。
   (一年的準備時間應該夠。)

以上謹提供作為參考。