What is a constructive reduction-to-practice in the context of interference?
A constructive reduction-to-practice in the context of interference refers to a description in an application that would have anticipated the subject matter of a count. MPEP § 2304.02(c) states:
“A description in an application that would have anticipated the subject matter of a count is called a constructive reduction-to-practice of the count. One disclosed embodiment is enough to have anticipated the subject matter of the count.”
Importantly, if an application is relying on a chain of benefit disclosures, the anticipating disclosure must be continuously disclosed through the entire benefit chain. The MPEP cites:
“See Tas v. Beachy, 626 Fed. App’x. 999, 1002 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (nonprecedential) (when a party to an interference seeks the benefit of an earlier-filed U.S. patent application, the earlier application must contain a written description of the subject matter of the interference Count, and must meet the enablement requirement.)”
Constructive reduction-to-practice is crucial in determining priority in interference proceedings, as it establishes the earliest date an invention was described in a patent application.
To learn more: