期刊論文1. | Mossinghoff, Hon. Gerald J.、Kuni, Stephen G.、李淑蓮(2013)。新的領證後複審程序間接提升美國專利品質。北美智權報,82。 延伸查詢 |
2. | Cohen, Eric C.(2014)。A Primer on Inter Partes Review, Covered Business Method Review, and Post-Grant Review before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board。Fed. ClR. B. J.,24,1-3。 |
3. | 楊智傑(20150909)。涵蓋商業方法專利複審程序最終書面決定之審查:聯邦巡迴上訴法院Versata v. SAP案。北美智權報,141。 延伸查詢 |
4. | John, Stefano、張宇凱(20150422)。「潛水艇專利」的落日餘暉。北美智權報,131。 延伸查詢 |
5. | Baluch, Andrew S.、Dickinson, Q. Todd(20151020)。Intellectual Property Owners Association。Association, IPO Law Journal。 |
6. | 張哲倫(20070400)。專利無效訴訟與舉發雙軌制之調協--美國及日本運作之啟示。律師雜誌,331,57-77。 延伸查詢 |
7. | 許正順(20140400)。從雙軌制之運作談如何提高專利侵權訴訟之裁判品質--兼論提起再審之訴的可行性。專利師,17,119-141。 延伸查詢 |
8. | Christoff, Benjamin J.(2013)。Blurring the Boundaries: How the Additional Grounds for Post-Grant Review in the America Invents Act Raise Issues with Separation of Powers and the Administrative Procedure Act。Dayton L. Rev.,39,111。 |
9. | 劉國讚(20060500)。美國專利無效之訴訟及複審制度之研究。智慧財產權月刊,89,5-32。 延伸查詢 |
10. | 吳東都(20050100)。從美國專利訴訟制度論設立我國專利法院。臺灣本土法學雜誌,66,15-35。 延伸查詢 |
其他1. | USPTO(20150913)。Inter Partes Review, 2014/12,http://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/ptab_update_proposed_changes_to。 |
2. | Quinn emanuelurquhart & sullivan(2012)。美國國會制定專利訴談型審查程序,http://www.quinnemanuelcht.com/the-firm/news-events/article-february-2012-patentlitigation-update。 |
3. | USPTO(20150913)。Post Grant Review, 2014/12,http://www.uspto.gov/patentsapplication-process/appealing-patent-decisions/trials/post-grant-review。 |
4. | Birch, Stewart,Kolasch & Birch, LLP(20150927)。Starting an AIA Post-Grant Proceeding: The Different Threshold Standards,http://www.postgrantproceedings.com/resources/resources/procedures/Threshold_Standards.html。 |
5. | USPTO(20150927)。Transitional Program for Covered Business Method Patents, 2014/12,http://www.uspto.gov/patents-appIication-process/appealing-patent-decisions/triaIs/transitional-program-covered-business。 |
6. | 潘榮恩。Real party-in-interest案例討論--RPX Corp. v. VirnetX Inc. (P.T.A.B. 2014),http://enpan.blogspot.tw/2015/09/real-party-in-interest-rpx-corp-v.html。 |
7. | Law360(20150921)。A Definition for IPR Real Party-In-Interest,http://www.Iaw360.com/articles/548079/a-defmition-for-ipr-real-party-in-interest。 |
8. | Macedo, Charles R.,Hahm, Jung S.,Amster Rothstein & Ebenstein LLP(20151003)。Understanding PTAB Trials: Key Milestones in IPR, PGR and CBM Proceedings, 1, at 5, 2014,http://www.arelaw.com/publications/view/practicallaw1014/。 |
9. | 潘榮恩(20150907)。Routine Discovery v. Additional Discovery in AIA,http://enpan.blogspot.tw/2015/09/routine-discovery-v-addkional.html。 |
10. | IPWatchdog(20151020)。Overview of USPTO Proposed Rule Changes to Practice Before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board,http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2015/08/19/usptoproposed-rule-changes-to-ptab-practice/id=60773/。 |
11. | 科技產業資訊室--CAT(20120627)。GPS速限指示專利訴訟,Cuozzo Speed控告Garmin及克萊斯勒,http://cdnet.stpi.narl.org.tw/techroom/pclass/2012/pclass_12_A168.htm。 延伸查詢 |
12. | 馮震宇(20140530)。美國專利救濟制度改革複審救濟程序效益顯現,http://cdnet.stpi.narl.org.tw/techroom/pclass/2014/pclass_14-A185.htm。 延伸查詢 |