When is a disclosure considered an apparent inventor-originated disclosure?

This page is an FAQ based on guidance from the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure. It is provided as guidance, with links to the ground truth sources. This is information only: it is not legal advice.

A disclosure is considered an apparent inventor-originated disclosure when certain conditions are met. According to MPEP 2153.01(a):

“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.”

For example, if an application names A, B, and C as joint inventors, and a publication within the grace period names only A and B as authors, it is apparent that the disclosure is a grace period inventor disclosure and not prior art under AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1).