2018年知识产权法律论坛 (2018 Intellectual Property Forum)

by: Kilpatrick Townsend

合作单位 | Co-Sponsored by: Shanghai Zhangjiang Hi-Tech Park Development

我们诚邀您参加此次知识产权法律研讨会,与著名专利诉讼专家们一起,就各方最新资讯展开互动探讨。在瞬息万变的中国知识产权大环境下,本次研讨会将进一步巩固并增强您的公司对知识产权进行保护及商业化应用的能力。| We invite you to join our distinguished panel of litigation experts for this informative and interactive discussion, which will position you to preserve and enhance your company’s ability to protect and commercialize intellectual property in China’s rapidly changing IP environment.

2018年10月26日下午2:00-5:00 | Friday, October 26, 2018

下午1:30-2:00 p.m. 登记Registration
下午2:00-5:00 p.m. 论坛Forum

上海长荣桂冠酒店 | The Evergreen Laurel Hotel

上海浦东张江高科技园区祖冲之路1136号3号桂冠厅 | Room Laurel 3, No.1136 Zuchongzhi Road, Shanghai Pudong Software Park

地铁2号线金科路站 | Subway Line 2 Jinke Road station

议程 | Agenda

美国专利法更新 (U.S. Patent Law Update) (A. James Isbester) 法院在不断解决关于新兴技术、最高院法律声明和2011年新设立程序的问题。Isbester 先生将为您总结过去12个月中的重要判决,并结合当前的趋势,讨论最新的法律对个人专利和专利组合价值的影响。 | The courts continue to grapple with emerging technologies, Supreme Court legal pronouncements, and procedures newly created in 2011. Mr. Isbester will summarize the key decisions of the past 12 months, correlate those decisions to existing trends, and discuss how the most recent law affects the value of individual patents and patent portfolios.

Alice案件的后续:101驳回的案例法和法律实践的进一步发展 (The Alice Saga Continues: Further Developments in Section 101 Case Law and Practice) (Kristopher L. Reed) 自从2014年最高院做出开创性的Alice判决,法院和律师都在努力理解和应用其中设立的原则。Reed先生将与您讨论基于35 U.S.C. § 101 的Alice案例法的最新发展,以及对专利诉讼和审查实践的影响。| Since issuing in 2014, both courts and practitioners have struggled to understand and apply the principles set forth in the Supreme Court’s seminal Alice decision. Mr. Reed will discuss recent developments in Alice case law under 35 U.S.C. § 101 and the impact on both patent litigation and prosecution practice.

Mayo 案例讨论 – 如何为生命科学领域的崎岖道路指引方向 (Life After Mayo – How to Navigate Through the Rugged Terrain of the World of Life Sciences) (Grace Pan) Pan女士将继续Reed先生有关可专利性主题的讨论,但会特别聚焦于生命科学领域。她将探讨Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc.案件的判决对美国专利申请和诉讼的影响,具体而言,如何在美国专利诉讼中运用该案例进行辩护。| Ms. Pan will continue Mr. Reed’s discussion on patentable subject matter, but with specific focus on the life sciences technology. She will discuss how the Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc. decision impacts U.S. prosecution and litigation and in particular, how one can use Mayo offensively in U.S. litigation.

届时提供同声翻译 | Simultaneous translation services will be provided.

哪些人需要参加 | Who Should Attend?

公司管理层与决策者、法律顾问、知识产权经理及专员、业务经理、专利代理人、专利工程师以及其他负责了解及管理专利诉讼和策略的人士。此次研讨会将对中美专利诉讼中的问题进行及时分析,所有与会人员都将从中获益。| CEOs and decision makers, in-house counsel, IP managers and staff, business managers, patent agents, patent engineers, and others tasked with understanding and managing patent litigation and strategy will benefit from this timely analysis of both Chinese and U.S. Litigation issues.
请于2018年10月12日前回复 | RSVP by October 12, 2018.

更多相关信息,请发送电子邮件至hchen@kilpatricktownsend.com.与Holly Chen 联系。| For more information, please contact Holly Chen at hchen@kilpatricktownsend.com.

Share
DISCLAIMER

While we are pleased to have you contact us by telephone, surface mail, electronic mail, or by facsimile transmission, contacting Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP or any of its attorneys does not create an attorney-client relationship. The formation of an attorney-client relationship requires consideration of multiple factors, including possible conflicts of interest. An attorney-client relationship is formed only when both you and the Firm have agreed to proceed with a defined engagement.

DO NOT CONVEY TO US ANY INFORMATION YOU REGARD AS CONFIDENTIAL UNTIL A FORMAL CLIENT-ATTORNEY RELATIONSHIP HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED.

If you do convey information, you recognize that we may review and disclose the information, and you agree that even if you regard the information as highly confidential and even if it is transmitted in a good faith effort to retain us, such a review does not preclude us from representing another client directly adverse to you, even in a matter where that information could be used against you.

×