What is the difference between apparent and non-apparent inventor-originated disclosures?

The distinction between apparent and non-apparent inventor-originated disclosures is important in determining how the USPTO treats prior art. According to MPEP 2153.01(a):

Apparent inventor-originated disclosures:

“A disclosure is not prior art under AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) if it is apparent from the disclosure itself that it is an inventor-originated disclosure. Specifically, Office personnel may not apply a disclosure as prior art under AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) if the disclosure:

1. was made one year or less before the effective filing date of the claimed invention;
2. names the inventor or a joint inventor as an author or an inventor; and
3. does not name additional persons as authors on a printed publication or joint inventors on a patent.”

Non-apparent inventor-originated disclosures:

“If, however, the application names fewer joint inventors than a publication (e.g., the application names as joint inventors A and B, and the publication names as authors A, B and C), it would not be readily apparent from the publication that it is an inventor-originated disclosure and the publication would be treated as prior art under AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) unless there is evidence of record that an exception under AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(1) applies.”

For non-apparent cases, applicants may need to provide additional evidence, such as an affidavit or declaration under 37 CFR 1.130(a), to establish that the disclosure qualifies for the exception.

To learn more:

• inventor-originated disclosure
• apparent disclosure
• non-apparent disclosure
• prior art