![]() |
|
IP As Property / IP Rights Transfers / Transfers of Intellectual Property TRANSFER OF PATENTS IN THE UNITED STATES The Patent Act provides that applications for patents,
granted patents, and any related interests are fully assignable and
transferable. [123] The act specifically
requires that the transfer must be effected by a written instrument.
[124] Such instrument should contain
language evidencing a clear and unmistakable intent to transfer ownership
and must be executed by the patentee or its assignees. [125]
Generally, a patent assignment conveys the exclusive right to make,
sell, or use a particular invention, although in many instances assignments
are effected to convey an undivided ownership interest in the patent.
[126] A valid assignment will put
the assignee in control of a patent standing to enforce any and all
rights thereunder. [127] Additionally,
a deed of assignment should expressly provide the assignee with the
right to sue for past infringement. [128]
The Patent Act specifically addresses the issue of
timely recordal of assignment documentation. [129]
The Patent Act states,
In the event of conflicting transfers of title in the
same patent or patent application, the Patent Act gives the first purchaser
a 90-day window in which to record. Even if a subsequent purchaser records
before the original purchaser, the first purchaser will prevail if it
records within the statutorily-granted 90-day period. However, the public
policy behind the statute is intended to protect the interests of bona
fide subsequent purchasers of patents who have acted without notice
of a prior, unrecorded assignment. [130]
A subsequent purchaser who has actual or constructive notice will not
be able to employ the protective measures of the patent recordal statute.
[131]
[123] See 35
U.S.C. §261. See also Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine Research,
Inc., 395 U.S. 100 (1969); Valmet Paper Machinery, Inc. v. Beloit Corp.,
868 FSupp. 1085 (W.D. Wis. 1994).
[124] Ibid.
[125] See University
Patents, Inc. v. Kligman, 762 F.Supp. 1212 (E.D. Pa. 1991).
[126] See Fifer
and Been, "The Acquisition and Disposition of Intellectual Property
in Commercial Transactions: The U.S. Perspective," as published in Intellectual
Property in the Global Marketplace. (New York: John Wiley & Sons,
1999).
[127] Valmet
Paper Machinery, Inc. v. Beloit Corp., 868 F.Supp. 1085 (W.D. Wis. 1994).
[128] Ibid.
[129] See
35 U.S.C. §261.
[130] See Thomas
v. Tomco Acquisitions, Inc., 776 F.Supp. 431 (E.D.Wis. 1991).
[131] Ibid.
|
|
|
![]() |
[Home] [About Ladas
& Parry LLP] [Contact Us] [Search]
[Trademarks] [Domain
Names & E-Commerce] [Patents &
Copyrights]
[Litigation] [IP
Rights Maintenance] [IP as Property]
[News & Bulletins]
(C) Copyright 2002 Ladas & Parry
Please read our disclaimer.