by djd on 11/21/10, 9:31 AM with 23 comments
by drallison on 11/21/10, 2:07 PM
If multiple inventors are named in a nonprovisional application, each named inventor must have made a contribution, individually or jointly, to the subject matter of at least one claim of the application and the application will be considered to be a joint application under 35 U.S.C. 116. If multiple inventors are named in a provisional application, each named inventor must have made a contribution, individually or jointly, to the subject matter disclosed in the provisional application and the provisional application will be considered to be a joint application under 35 U.S.C. 116.
I would recommend getting legal advice, collecting all documents related to the invention, and keeping a diary of all contacts with parties involved.
At some point he will need to sign a declaration (viz. 37CDR 1.45(a)):
Joint inventors must apply for a patent jointly and each must make the required oath or declaration: neither of them alone, nor less than the entire number, can apply for a patent for an invention invented by them jointly, except as provided in ยง 1.47.
However, the provisions of 37CFR1.47 allow:
If a joint inventor refuses to join in an application for patent or cannot be found or reached after diligent effort, the application may be made by the other inventor on behalf of himself or herself and the nonsigning inventor. The oath or declaration in such an application must be accompanied by a petition including proof of the pertinent facts,...
So, simply refusing to sign the declaration is probably not an option.
The post does not identify the offending university. I think that the aggrieved inventor should check to see what his university policy provides. For example, Stanford University policy can be found on the web at http://rph.stanford.edu/5-1.html. That policy provides that inventions of this sort can be placed in the public domain.
The inventors, acting collectively where there is more than one, are free to place their inventions in the public domain if they believe that would be in the best interest of technology transfer and if doing so is not in violation of the terms of any agreements that supported or related to the work.
Sadly, there does not seem to be a provision for resolving potential conflicts between named inventors nor a policy for determining whether a person should be named as an inventor.
by kljensen on 11/21/10, 12:16 PM
Second, "inventor" is a specific, defined thing under US law. Naming inventors who do not meet this definition can render the patent invalid. And, on a more practical level, a dispute over the inventorship will scare off licensors, precluding any revenue the patent would have brought the university.
(I have two patents, work at an IP related non profit, and own a popular IP news service. I am not a lawyer. I suggest you contact Gene Quinn, advocate of independent inventors.)
by robotron on 11/21/10, 11:01 AM
Or just move on and accept this as a lesson learned.
by dangrossman on 11/21/10, 10:32 AM
by ekidd on 11/21/10, 3:40 PM
In this case, I made two statements to the client:
1) Professionally, I did not believe the work was either original or non-obvious, and that for me to sign a declaration otherwise would be perjury.
2) Their agreements with me did not allow for them to patent my work (something for which I read contracts very carefully and seek professional advice on as needed).
They backed down pretty quickly at that point.
You might have luck with a similar approach: If there's something legally improper about the inventorship, or your school does not actually have the legal ability to compel you to patent your work, you may be able to get them to back down in a hurry by laying out the facts of the matter.
But I am not a lawyer, and if the school persists in this behavior, you'll want to speak with a good patent lawyer. You may want to call a couple of patent lawyers and describe the situation to them. You can usually learn a little bit about the merits of your case before they start charging. :-)
by patentguy on 11/21/10, 2:21 PM
by whatevers2009 on 11/21/10, 11:03 AM
by kolinko on 11/21/10, 10:44 AM
by savrajsingh on 11/21/10, 12:58 PM
by timelinex on 11/21/10, 12:42 PM
by kschua on 11/21/10, 11:32 PM
Just because he doesn't believe in patents doesn't mean others won't.
In large corporations, they are going to patent the idea irrespective of the inventor's belief.
So this is just an example of what he will face when he is out working.
by JoachimSchipper on 11/21/10, 11:55 AM
It's not at all impossible that they'd be mortified, too.