What is happening, page-642

It’s not that the Patent Offices are moving slow, it’s the due process that is required to allow for industry to oppose granted patent claims when it’s in the public domain. Everyone needs to be in the clear, so that we all may move forward with certainty and confidence.

Firstly, I’m no patent attorney and therefore I’m unfamiliar with the complex laws of each jurisdiction, so, I’m especially unaware if there has been any recent changes to the patent laws. However, changes are always occurring which is why you need attorneys in each to keep up to speed with them. So DYOR.

What we know is that the US and South Korean patent have been acceptance, but the industry itself needs time to study the patent and file any concerns or opposition that they may have to it within their respective country. For instance, in Australia, if anybody believes that they have a case, they must gather their evidence and file their case within 3 months of the published acceptance of an application. I believe, in Japan and South Korea it is 6 months and in the USA it is 9 months.

What I find most interesting is that it has been suggested that Archer announced the Japanese patent at the beginning of this year, only 2 months after it was granted. If that was right, why didn’t Archer wait the 6 months to be absolutely sure? Clearly for some reason they didn't need to. Also there is the possibility that the the patents which are all part of the same WIPO ‘family’ mean that this process can be sped up? Otherwise, we could be waiting until the end of April or early May 2022 (approx. 9 months) for the US patent to be officially cleared and accepted by the market. Maybe we need to wait that long anyhow.

Needless to say, Archer aren’t going to rush things either. When and if any kind of opposition is filed, the patent applicant and the opponent each have an opportunity to provide evidence to the Commissioner of Patents to support their case. Whilst I can’t say that Archer is a ‘sure thing’ but any oppositional evidence must be credible (not time wasting) and be able to date back throughout a decade or so of published evidence and data that clearly Archer has already. Archer has made that point and the very special claim that, ‘this patent is hard to erode’.

Even so, it will be worth the wait and doesn’t halt any reason for Archer to start the process of adaptability, implementation or commercial negotiations. After all, their aren’t any similar/comparative room-temperature patents of this nature in the mix are there?

Exciting times for those who are patient.

All IMO. DYOR. GLTA(Patient)H