Patent Law FAQ
This FAQ answers all your questions about patent law, patent procedure, and the patent examination process.
MPEP 2100 – Patentability (3)
The AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(A) exception applies broadly to U.S. patent documents. According to the MPEP:
The 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(A) exception may possibly apply to any U.S. patent document, regardless of its potential prior art date under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2). In other words, there is no grace period limitation to the applicability of the 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(A) exception.
This means that the exception can potentially be applied to any U.S. patent, U.S. patent application publication, or WIPO published application, regardless of when it was published or filed. The key factor is whether the subject matter was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or joint inventor.
To learn more:
Under AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a), there are two main categories of prior art:
- AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1): This includes documents and activities such as issued patents, published applications, non-patent printed publications, public use, sale, or other public availability of the claimed invention.
- AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2): This specifically covers U.S. patent documents.
The MPEP states: “The categories of prior art documents and activities are set forth in AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and the categories of prior art patent documents are set forth in AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2).” This means that these categories are used to determine the novelty and non-obviousness of a claimed invention.
To learn more:
35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) applies to certain patent documents as prior art. The MPEP states:
“U.S. patents, U.S. patent applications published under 35 U.S.C. 122(b), and international patent applications published under the Patent Cooperation Treaty to another are prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) if the effectively filed date of the disclosure of the reference is before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.”
Key points to understand:
- The reference’s effectively filed date must be before the claimed invention’s effective filing date
- The reference can be prior art even if its publication date is after the claimed invention’s effective filing date
- 35 U.S.C. 102(d) determines when subject matter in these documents was “effectively filed”
Exceptions to 102(a)(2) prior art are provided in 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2), including disclosures of the inventor’s own work and common ownership scenarios.
To learn more:
MPEP 2152 – Detailed Discussion Of Aia 35 U.S.C. 102(A) And (B) (1)
Under AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a), there are two main categories of prior art:
- AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1): This includes documents and activities such as issued patents, published applications, non-patent printed publications, public use, sale, or other public availability of the claimed invention.
- AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2): This specifically covers U.S. patent documents.
The MPEP states: “The categories of prior art documents and activities are set forth in AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and the categories of prior art patent documents are set forth in AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2).” This means that these categories are used to determine the novelty and non-obviousness of a claimed invention.
To learn more:
MPEP 2152.05 – Determining Whether To Apply 35 U.S.C. 102(A)(1) Or 102(A)(2) (1)
35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) applies to certain patent documents as prior art. The MPEP states:
“U.S. patents, U.S. patent applications published under 35 U.S.C. 122(b), and international patent applications published under the Patent Cooperation Treaty to another are prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) if the effectively filed date of the disclosure of the reference is before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.”
Key points to understand:
- The reference’s effectively filed date must be before the claimed invention’s effective filing date
- The reference can be prior art even if its publication date is after the claimed invention’s effective filing date
- 35 U.S.C. 102(d) determines when subject matter in these documents was “effectively filed”
Exceptions to 102(a)(2) prior art are provided in 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2), including disclosures of the inventor’s own work and common ownership scenarios.
To learn more:
MPEP 2154.02(A) – Prior Art Exception Under Aia 35 U.S.C. 102(B)(2)(A) To Aia 35 U.S.C. 102(A)(2) (Inventor – Originated Disclosure Exception) (1)
The AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(A) exception applies broadly to U.S. patent documents. According to the MPEP:
The 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(A) exception may possibly apply to any U.S. patent document, regardless of its potential prior art date under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2). In other words, there is no grace period limitation to the applicability of the 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(A) exception.
This means that the exception can potentially be applied to any U.S. patent, U.S. patent application publication, or WIPO published application, regardless of when it was published or filed. The key factor is whether the subject matter was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or joint inventor.
To learn more:
Patent Law (5)
The AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(A) exception applies broadly to U.S. patent documents. According to the MPEP:
The 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(A) exception may possibly apply to any U.S. patent document, regardless of its potential prior art date under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2). In other words, there is no grace period limitation to the applicability of the 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(A) exception.
This means that the exception can potentially be applied to any U.S. patent, U.S. patent application publication, or WIPO published application, regardless of when it was published or filed. The key factor is whether the subject matter was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or joint inventor.
To learn more:
An Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) is a mechanism by which patent applicants can comply with the duty of disclosure provided in 37 CFR 1.56. It allows applicants to submit information that is material to patentability to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO).
According to the MPEP, The provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and 37 CFR 1.98 provide a mechanism by which patent applicants may comply with the duty of disclosure provided in 37 CFR 1.56 using an IDS.
This means that an IDS is a formal way to disclose relevant prior art and other information to the patent examiner.
To learn more:
Under AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a), there are two main categories of prior art:
- AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1): This includes documents and activities such as issued patents, published applications, non-patent printed publications, public use, sale, or other public availability of the claimed invention.
- AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2): This specifically covers U.S. patent documents.
The MPEP states: “The categories of prior art documents and activities are set forth in AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and the categories of prior art patent documents are set forth in AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2).” This means that these categories are used to determine the novelty and non-obviousness of a claimed invention.
To learn more:
When responding to an objection regarding unlabeled prior art figures, applicants must follow specific procedures for submitting corrected drawings. According to MPEP 608.02(g), the process involves:
- Submitting corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d).
- Labeling the replacement sheet(s) as ‘Replacement Sheet’ in the page header, as per 37 CFR 1.84(c).
- Ensuring that the labeling does not obstruct any portion of the drawing figures.
- Designating the prior art figure with a legend such as ‘Prior Art’.
The MPEP states: Corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The replacement sheet(s) should be labeled ‘Replacement Sheet’ in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing figures.
It’s crucial to follow these instructions carefully to ensure that the objection is resolved and to avoid further complications in the patent prosecution process.
To learn more:
35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) applies to certain patent documents as prior art. The MPEP states:
“U.S. patents, U.S. patent applications published under 35 U.S.C. 122(b), and international patent applications published under the Patent Cooperation Treaty to another are prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) if the effectively filed date of the disclosure of the reference is before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.”
Key points to understand:
- The reference’s effectively filed date must be before the claimed invention’s effective filing date
- The reference can be prior art even if its publication date is after the claimed invention’s effective filing date
- 35 U.S.C. 102(d) determines when subject matter in these documents was “effectively filed”
Exceptions to 102(a)(2) prior art are provided in 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2), including disclosures of the inventor’s own work and common ownership scenarios.
To learn more:
Patent Procedure (5)
The AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(A) exception applies broadly to U.S. patent documents. According to the MPEP:
The 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(A) exception may possibly apply to any U.S. patent document, regardless of its potential prior art date under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2). In other words, there is no grace period limitation to the applicability of the 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(A) exception.
This means that the exception can potentially be applied to any U.S. patent, U.S. patent application publication, or WIPO published application, regardless of when it was published or filed. The key factor is whether the subject matter was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or joint inventor.
To learn more:
An Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) is a mechanism by which patent applicants can comply with the duty of disclosure provided in 37 CFR 1.56. It allows applicants to submit information that is material to patentability to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO).
According to the MPEP, The provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and 37 CFR 1.98 provide a mechanism by which patent applicants may comply with the duty of disclosure provided in 37 CFR 1.56 using an IDS.
This means that an IDS is a formal way to disclose relevant prior art and other information to the patent examiner.
To learn more:
Under AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a), there are two main categories of prior art:
- AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1): This includes documents and activities such as issued patents, published applications, non-patent printed publications, public use, sale, or other public availability of the claimed invention.
- AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2): This specifically covers U.S. patent documents.
The MPEP states: “The categories of prior art documents and activities are set forth in AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and the categories of prior art patent documents are set forth in AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2).” This means that these categories are used to determine the novelty and non-obviousness of a claimed invention.
To learn more:
When responding to an objection regarding unlabeled prior art figures, applicants must follow specific procedures for submitting corrected drawings. According to MPEP 608.02(g), the process involves:
- Submitting corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d).
- Labeling the replacement sheet(s) as ‘Replacement Sheet’ in the page header, as per 37 CFR 1.84(c).
- Ensuring that the labeling does not obstruct any portion of the drawing figures.
- Designating the prior art figure with a legend such as ‘Prior Art’.
The MPEP states: Corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The replacement sheet(s) should be labeled ‘Replacement Sheet’ in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing figures.
It’s crucial to follow these instructions carefully to ensure that the objection is resolved and to avoid further complications in the patent prosecution process.
To learn more:
35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) applies to certain patent documents as prior art. The MPEP states:
“U.S. patents, U.S. patent applications published under 35 U.S.C. 122(b), and international patent applications published under the Patent Cooperation Treaty to another are prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) if the effectively filed date of the disclosure of the reference is before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.”
Key points to understand:
- The reference’s effectively filed date must be before the claimed invention’s effective filing date
- The reference can be prior art even if its publication date is after the claimed invention’s effective filing date
- 35 U.S.C. 102(d) determines when subject matter in these documents was “effectively filed”
Exceptions to 102(a)(2) prior art are provided in 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2), including disclosures of the inventor’s own work and common ownership scenarios.
To learn more: