Brion Raffoul Congratulates New Patent Agent Stacey Dunn

The firm would like to congratulate Stacey Dunn for passing the 2019 Canadian Patent Agent Qualification Examinations to become a Registered Canadian Patent Agent. Stacey has a background in molecular genetics and specializes in the life sciences. Stacey is also a lawyer in Ontario and actively supports our legal practice in the area of IP licensing and enforcement.

Brion Raffoul is a premier Canadian IP boutique providing clients with a full range of patent, design, and trademark procurement services, as well as legal advice in the field of IP.  We take time to know our clients and are committed to providing excellent quality service in a timely manner. If you have any questions about intellectual property, please feel free to reach out to any of our professionals.

5 Tips for the Ottawa IP Summer Law Student Recruitment Process (Fall 2019)

By: Stacey Dunn

Getting a job in law school can be daunting – there are relatively few summer job positions compared to the mass number of student applicants. If you know you want to specialize in IP, this ratio is even less in your favour. Here are five tips to help get through the Ottawa IP summer recruitment process:

I. Do Your Homework

Research, Research, Research – this point CANNOT be stressed enough. There are three general areas of research you should be doing: research the firm, research the interviewers, and research recent and current summer and articling students.

(1) Research the Firm

Make sure you understand the firm you are applying at. Many firms have a specific culture and values and it’s important that you agree with the direction the firm is going in. Afterall, many summer positions lead to articling and then to an associate position. Make sure that firm is where you want to spend the next few years. You’ll hear a lot about whether or not a student has a good “fit” with a firm – however, it’s equally as important that you think the firm is a good “fit” with you. For example, some firms track billable hours and your performance metrics are largely based on the number of billable hours you have a year. Other firms do not track billable hours and charge on a fixed fee basis. Billable hours vs fixed fee can have a significant impact on your work-life balance. It’s important that you make the right choice for your lifestyle.

(2) Research the Interviewers

You should always know who you will be interviewing with. If you were not informed when scheduling the interview, ask! This will show that you’re are interested and proactive. Make sure you memorize, at the very least, each person’s name, position, and scientific background. Also, consider asking your interviewers questions about their scientific/engineering background. Afterall, many IP summer jobs are in patent prosecution or patent litigation. The interviewers will be interested in your scientific or engineering prowess. You can impress them by asking them specific scientific questions related to their background. When researching your interviewers, look into papers or articles they’ve previously written. Regardless of whether the articles are about IP or science, asking them specific questions about their own expertise will surely impress them!

(3) Research Recent and Current Summer and Articling Students

Look into previous students at the firm. There is nothing worse than interviewing a candidate who asks generic questions, like “what type of tasks will I be working on” or “what is a typical day like for a student”. While these may be valid questions, your questions should be tailored to the organization. For example, instead of asking “what type of tasks will I be working on”, ask “I noticed on your website that X (a recent student or articling student) has a similar scientific/engineering background as I do. What types of daily tasks do they work on and would I be expected to do similar tasks?”

II. Reach Out to Someone at the Firm Before Applying

To show interest in the firm, it’s always a good idea to reach out to a student or young associate at the firm to ask if you can take them out for coffee or do a phone “informational” interview (i.e., to ask them questions about their job and about the firm in general). The summer is a perfect time to do this (i.e., before the recruitment process starts – there are rules about contacting students during the recruitment process). Do your research on all the potential people you could ask and choose someone that you have a connection with – no matter how small. Did you do your undergrad at the same school? Do they have the same technical background? Did they attend the same law school? Are they from the same city? All you need is a small connection to show you did your research when cold calling or sending them an email.

III. Be Willing to Travel

This is the time to invest in your career. You may not have much money to travel at this point but traveling to attend an interview can make or break getting a summer job. For example, I was specifically told once that the only reason I did not get a job was because I did not travel to the city for the second interview (the second interview was conducted via Skype™). This was after the recruiter told me that it was “no problem” that I couldn’t travel to that city. Lesson learned.

IV. Know Your Own Skills

This may seem like a given – you wrote your resume and should obviously know your skills and experience. However, you’d be shocked at how many interviewees stumble at questions about their own skills. Reviewing your own resume and having a clear list in your head of the skills you learned with each experience can also help boost your confidence during the interview. Furthermore, always review your previous scientific or technical projects – it is not uncommon for questions about previous projects to come up in an interview. Not knowing the answer to a scientific question about your own previous research projects is fatal to getting that job.

V. Don’t Underestimate Small Firms

If you really want a summer IP position, don’t limit your applications to the big firms. Smaller IP boutiques are great training grounds because students don’t get pigeonholed into a specific role. Generally, at a large firm, you’re placed in a specific technical group and that is the type of work you’ll be doing all summer. At a smaller firm, you will get exposure to several different technical areas and potentially different areas of IP. Resulting not only in a more interesting summer, but better overall training that will result in you being a more rounded and knowledgeable lawyer.

Another advantage of a small firm is that you generally have more hands-on training. At a big firm, it’s easy for students to get lost in the shuffle. At a smaller firm, you often have direct training from partners and advanced associates. Furthermore, working at a smaller firm gives you more visibility to stand out. Combine that with significantly less competition and you have a much higher chance of getting hired.

Lastly, if you don’t get that summer position, don’t fret – the majority of law students do not get law related summer jobs. However, it’s always a good idea to call or email each recruiter to ask for feedback on the process. After all, “the only real mistake is the one from which we learn nothing” – Henry Ford.

The New Gold Rush: Open Innovation in Canada

“It’s impossible for any organization to have all the best ideas”

~ General Electric, Open Innovation Manifesto

Open Innovation as an R&D strategy may seem counter-intuitive; traditional corporate culture dictates the use of secret R&D labs that operate in an information silo. However, open innovation can offer many competitive advantages, such as complimenting your company’s internal skills and know-how with external knowledge and ideas, lowering R&D costs, and increasing differentiation in the market.

For example, in 2000, the Canadian gold mining company Goldcorp Inc. crowdsourced gold prospecting in an under-performing mine; Goldcorp knew they were sitting on a literal and figurative gold mine but their geologists could not find the main deposits of gold. Goldcorp created a challenge for the general public; they released all Goldcorp’s geological data (going back as far as 1948) and offered $575,000 in prize money to the innovators that could find the elusive gold deposits. At the time, this type of open innovation was contrary to traditional mining practices: Goldcorp was admitting they were unable to find the gold and was releasing all their proprietary data. However, Goldcorp’s challenge led to more than 110 gold deposits that yielded over $6 billion worth of gold.

So, if that doesn’t answer why open innovation is a worthy consideration for any business, consider that patent filings in Canada have not increased significantly in the past ten (10) years. However, this stagnation is not an issue of lack of funding. Indeed, statistics from Industry Canada indicate that Canada is second only to the United States when it comes to venture capitalist funding.


Collaboration between companies and with the public at large should be considered to invigorate innovation in Canada. In another successful example of open innovation, Bombardier held a contest to solicit urban mobility designs. They created a social media open innovation community integrated with live, offline workshops. The contest rules stipulated that the winners must transfer their IP to Bombardier in exchange for a small prize. Bombardier also kept a right of first refusal for a year for all non-winning ideas. By creating a community around innovation, even outside their company, Bombardier created a sense of self-determination and pride in the community, that resulted in innovation pouring into Bombardier. Indeed, Bombardier received input from 2,486 participants from 102 countries that contributed 4,239 designs, 25,979 evaluations, 8,565 comments and 3,445 messages on Bombardier’s proposed urban transportation projects. As a bonus to uncovering a gold mine of innovation, Bombardier customers were very receptive to their more open and customer-orientated brand.

However, it is important to note that “open” innovation does not necessarily mean the innovation is in the public domain; the devil is in the details. IP ownership provisions should be clearly outlined in an agreement between all involved parties. The following questions can be helpful in outlining the preferred ownership details:

  • Who will own the IP stemming from the project (foreground IP)?
    • What about jointly created IP (joint ownership/management of IP assets should be approached with caution)?
    • Consider motivation factor for crowdsourcing when innovators own their IP?
    • Does a royalty-free license in perpetuity make sense given the motivations of the IP owner (i.e., the company or the innovator)?
  • What IP do the innovators and the company already own (background IP)?
  • Who owns the feedback stemming from the project?
  • Should a right of first refusal be included for IP that is not exploited during the project?

The bottom line: open innovation can be a great way to invigorate innovation within your company without resorting to a significant increase in R&D funding.

Canada is Modernizing its Patent Act and Rules to Streamline Procedures for Applicants

By: Edward Wu

Following the Government’s recent decision to ratify the Patent Law Treaty (PLT), the Orders in Council (OIC) published that the amendments to the Patent Act and Patent Rules under the Economic Action Plan 2014 Act and Economic Action Plan 2015 Act will come into force on October 30, 2019. Furthermore, the new Patent Rules will be published on July 10, 2019, under the Registration Number SOR/ 2019-0251.

The following important changes will be coming into force on October 30, 2019:

42-Month Deadline for National Phase Entries No Longer “As of Right”

The 42-month deadline for Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) National Phase entries is no longer “as of right”. To utilize the 12-month extension, Applicants must submit a statement that the failure to meet the regular 30-month deadline was unintentional. Clients should be aware of the shortened period for national entries and make corresponding arrangements.

Requirements of Certified Copies for Priority Documents

After October 30, 2019, certified copies of priority documents must be filed with the Office; however, this requirement does not apply if the priority document is an earlier Canadian Application or, in the case of a national phase entry, where the PCT priority document requirement has already been satisfied. Clients should be aware of this change and make preparations for document certification, if necessary.

Easier to Obtain Filing Dates

International clients can now obtain a filing date without translating the Description because the new Patent Rules will no longer require an English or French Description for obtaining a filing date. The translation of the Description may now follow at a later date.

Furthermore, the new Patent Rules will allow Applicants to obtain a filing date on any day of the year by filing electronically, even on days where the Patent Office is closed for a holiday or the weekend. This important change will allow Applicants to obtain a quick filing date prior to any disclosures being made.

Restoration of Priority Claim

The new Patent Rules provide relief for Applicants that unintentionally miss the deadline for a priority request. The 12-month period for priority claims may be extended to fourteen (14) months if the Applicant submits that the delay was unintentional. However, the Federal Court may revoke the priority request if they later determine that the delay was intentional. Clients should be aware of the limited application of this new right of restoration for priority claims.

Please refer to Brion Raffoul’s previous article for more information regarding the new Patent Act and Patent Rules.

IAMPATENT1000 ranked Brion Raffoul as one of top 14 patent prosecution firms in Canada

IAMPATENT1000 is one of the most respected rankings for patent professionals globally because of peer review in validating its research. The IAMPATENT1000 published the following about Brion Raffoul:

Ottawa-based IP specialist Brion Raffoul is the recipient of emphatic feedback from the market: “Its professionals are extremely organised, proactive and very easy to work with. They have an excellent grasp of their subjects, execute with speed and precision, all while being very responsive.” Cited as being “entrepreneurial and driven practitioners with world-class skills”, Art Brion and Natalie Raffoul form the fulcrum around which the practice turns. Brion is an influential figure in the start-up community and a sought-after representative for companies spun off from universities. Business methods and software patents are bread and butter for Raffoul, who is a “creative, cost-effective, efficient and solutions-oriented partner”.

For more information: https://www.iam-media.com/directories/patent1000/rankings/canada

Ms. Dominique Lambert to attend BIO International Convention from June 3-6

Ms. Dominique Lambert will be representing the patent team at the BIO International Convention (BIO) being held in Philadelphia from June 3 to June 6, 2019.

https://convention.bio.org/

BIO attracts 16,000+ biotechnology and pharma leaders who come together to discover new opportunities and promising partnerships, bringing together a wide spectrum of life science and application areas including drug discovery, biomanufacturing, genomics, biofuels, nanotechnology and cell therapy.

Natalie Raffoul and Dennis Haszko to attend INTA’s Annual Meeting from May 18-22

https://www.inta.org/2019annual/Pages/Home.aspx

The INTA Annual Meeting has become the largest intellectual property congress every year. Managing partner, Natalie Raffoul, and Senior Patent Counsel, Dennis Haszko, look forward to meeting with numerous IP colleagues from around the globe and on exchanging updates on IP practice globally. The Meeting is being held in Boston from May 18 to 22, 2019.

Bonne nouvelle! Une version française de notre site web!

Bonne nouvelle!  Puisque nous offrons tous nos services dans les deux langues officielles, nous avons maintenant une version française de notre site web.  Jetez-y un coup d’œil : https://bripgroup.com/fr/

Dominique Lambert participera au FORPIQ le 1er mai, 2019 à Montréal

Le Forum International sur la Propriété Intellectuelle – Québec (FORPIQ) tiendra sa 10eme édition à Montréal le 1er mai 2019 sous le thème « Naviguer dans une ère où innovation ouverte et propriété intellectuelle s’entremêlent ». Brion Raffoul y sera représenté par l’une de ses agents de brevets, Dominique Lambert. Une programmation relevée et des discussions stimulantes en perspective!

https://www.forpiq.com/accueil#a-propos
https://www.linkedin.com/company/forpiq/

#forpiq10e

Protecting Your Innovation: Improvement Patents

Build a better mousetrap, and the world will beat a path to your door.”

Blockchain, nanomaterials, AI, CRISPR – disruptive technologies can transform entire industries.  A common misconception is that patents are only for protecting cutting-edge and disruptive innovation. Indeed, only technology that is new and non-obvious can be protected by a patent. However, these requirements do not mean that only disruptive technologies can be protected. In fact, the Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO) estimates that 90% of patents are for improvements to existing patented inventions. For example, a patent was granted this week for a bar of soap!

An improvement patent is based on technology that builds on a previous idea or invention – a better mouse trap if you will. An improvement patent does not give you the right to use the original patented invention as the patent holder can exclude others from using their invention. However, an improvement patent gives you the right to exclude others from using the improvement.

Exclusivity over the improvement can be a valuable defensive tool when faced with the threat of an infringement suit. Companies can avoid protracted and expensive patent litigation by aligning with would-be competitors or infringers and cross-licensing your technology with the patent holder of the original invention.
A cross-license is an agreement to grant mutual rights to each party’s respective patents.

A perfect example of a beneficial cross-licensing relationship is Google and Samsung Electronics, who signed a broad cross-licensing agreement in 2014. By joining forces, Google and Samsung Electronics mitigated their risk of infringement, allowing the companies to place a larger emphasis on innovation. Cross-licensing agreements are especially effective for companies that target different markets, creating a win-win for everyone.

Far too often companies underestimate the value of small improvements made to existing technology. By protecting incremental improvements, companies can bolster their IP portfolio and create new opportunities to license other technology.