What role does “prophylaxis” play in Step 2A Prong Two analysis?

Prophylaxis, or preventive treatment, plays a significant role in the Step 2A Prong Two analysis as outlined in MPEP 2106.04(d)(2). The MPEP states: “[A] claim directed to a prophylaxis or treatment can integrate the recited judicial exception into a practical application by applying or using the judicial exception to effect a particular prophylaxis or treatment…

Read More

Can prophetic examples be used to satisfy the enablement requirement?

Yes, prophetic examples can be used to satisfy the enablement requirement in patent applications. The MPEP 2164.02 provides guidance on this: “Compliance with the enablement requirement of 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph, does not turn on whether an example is disclosed. An example may be “working” or “prophetic.”” However, it’s…

Read More

What makes a Markush grouping proper?

A Markush grouping is considered proper if the members of the group share both: A “single structural similarity” A common use This requirement can be met in two ways: The alternatives are all members of the same recognized physical or chemical class or the same art-recognized class, and are disclosed in the specification or known…

Read More

What is a proper Markush group in patent claims?

What is a proper Markush group in patent claims? A proper Markush group in patent claims is a closed group of alternatives. According to MPEP 2117, “A Markush claim contains an ‘improper Markush grouping’ if either: (1) the members of the Markush group do not share a ‘single structural similarity’ or (2) the members do…

Read More

How does profit motive affect experimental use in patent law?

The presence of a profit motive does not automatically negate experimental use in patent law, but it can significantly impact how the use is perceived. According to MPEP 2133.03(e): “However, profit motive and experimentation are not mutually exclusive. The fact that the inventor may have some commercial goal does not necessarily negate an experimental purpose.”…

Read More

How are ‘products of nature’ evaluated for patent eligibility?

Products of nature are evaluated for patent eligibility using the markedly different characteristics analysis. This analysis compares the claimed nature-based product to its naturally occurring counterpart to determine if it has markedly different characteristics. As stated in MPEP 2106.04(c): “Nature-based products, as used herein, include both eligible and ineligible products and merely refer to the…

Read More

What is a “product of nature” in patent law?

A “product of nature” in patent law refers to a physical product that is essentially a law of nature or natural phenomenon. The MPEP Section 2106.04(b) explains: “When a law of nature or natural phenomenon is claimed as a physical product, the courts have often referred to the exception as a ‘product of nature’.” Products…

Read More