Legal Definitions - award in interference

An award in interference refers to the formal decision made by a patent office or a court in a specific type of legal proceeding known as an "interference." Historically, in patent systems like that of the United States before the America Invents Act (AIA) of 2011, an interference proceeding was initiated when two or more inventors filed separate patent applications claiming the same invention.

The primary purpose of an interference proceeding was to determine which party was the first to invent the technology in question. The "award" was the final judgment that granted patent priority—and therefore the right to the patent—to the party proven to be the earliest inventor, regardless of who filed their application first.

Here are some examples to illustrate this concept:

• Pharmaceutical Discovery: Imagine Dr. Anya, working independently, invents a novel compound for treating a rare disease and files a patent application. Simultaneously, a research team at "Global Pharma Inc.," unaware of Dr. Anya's work, develops the exact same compound and files their own patent application shortly after Dr. Anya. Because both applications claim the identical invention, the patent office initiates an interference proceeding. After reviewing evidence such as lab notebooks, experimental data, and witness testimonies, the patent office determines that Dr. Anya conceived of the invention and reduced it to practice several months before Global Pharma's team. The patent office would then issue an award in interference in favor of Dr. Anya, granting her the priority and the exclusive right to the patent for the new drug.

• Software Innovation: A small startup, "CodeGenius," develops a groundbreaking algorithm that significantly optimizes data compression. They file a patent application. Unbeknownst to CodeGenius, a large tech company, "MegaCorp," had been working on a very similar algorithm internally and filed their patent application a few weeks earlier. The patent office identifies that both applications describe essentially the same inventive concept. During the interference proceeding, CodeGenius presents detailed development logs, early prototypes, and emails showing their team had fully developed and tested the algorithm months before MegaCorp's earliest documented work, even though MegaCorp filed first. The patent office, recognizing CodeGenius's earlier invention date, would issue an award in interference, establishing CodeGenius as the rightful first inventor and granting them the patent.

• Renewable Energy Device: An individual inventor, Mr. Ben Carter, designs and builds a unique wind turbine blade that significantly increases energy capture. He files a patent application. A university research lab, having worked on a similar concept, also files a patent application for an identical blade design a few weeks later. An interference proceeding is declared to resolve who invented it first. Mr. Carter provides compelling evidence, including dated blueprints, receipts for materials, and photographs of his prototype in operation from a year prior to the university's earliest documented work. Despite the university's later filing date, the evidence proves Mr. Carter was the first to invent. The patent office would issue an award in interference to Mr. Carter, confirming his priority and right to the patent.