How does the Pfaff test apply to the on-sale bar in patent law?
The Pfaff test, established by the Supreme Court in Pfaff v. Wells Electronics, Inc., is crucial for determining whether an invention is “on sale” for purposes of the on-sale bar in patent law. According to MPEP 2152.02(d), the Pfaff test requires that: The product must be the subject of a commercial offer for sale; and…
Read MoreHow can I file a petition to accept an unintentionally delayed benefit claim?
To file a petition to accept an unintentionally delayed benefit claim, you should: File the petition under 37 CFR 1.78 Explain the reasons for the delay and demonstrate that it was unintentional Pay the required petition fee Submit the benefit claim (either through a corrected ADS or specification amendment, depending on your application’s filing date)…
Read MoreHow does the “person of ordinary skill in the art” concept affect claim interpretation?
The concept of a “person of ordinary skill in the art” (POSITA) is crucial in patent claim interpretation. According to MPEP 2111, claim interpretation should be based on how a POSITA would understand the claim terms. The MPEP states: “The focus of the inquiry regarding the meaning of a claim should be what would be…
Read MoreWhat is the “person of ordinary skill in the art” in obviousness determinations?
The “person of ordinary skill in the art” is a hypothetical figure used in obviousness determinations under 35 U.S.C. 103. The MPEP explains: “To reach a proper determination under 35 U.S.C. 103, the examiner must step backward in time and into the shoes worn by the hypothetical ‘person of ordinary skill in the art’.” This…
Read MoreWhat is the significance of the Perricone v. Medicis Pharm. Corp. case in genus-species anticipation?
The Perricone v. Medicis Pharm. Corp. case is significant in understanding genus-species anticipation in patent law. As discussed in MPEP 2131.02, this case provides important insights into how prior art disclosures are interpreted in relation to genus-species claims. The MPEP cites the case: “In Perricone v. Medicis Pharm. Corp., 432 F.3d 1368, 1376-77, 77 USPQ2d…
Read MoreWhat types of testing are permitted under experimental use in patent law?
The MPEP outlines several types of testing that may be considered permissible experimental use: Developmental testing in the normal context of technological development Experimentation to determine utility under 35 U.S.C. 101 Testing of functional features in design patent applications However, the MPEP explicitly states that market testing is not permitted: “Experimentation to determine product acceptance,…
Read MoreWhat constitutes permitted experimental activity in patent law?
Permitted experimental activity in patent law generally includes testing an invention in the normal context of its technological development. According to MPEP 2133.03(e)(6), “Testing of an invention in the normal context of its technological development is generally within the realm of permitted experimental activity.” This can include: Developmental testing Experimentation to determine utility as applied…
Read MoreWhat are examples of permissible negative limitations in patent claims?
What are examples of permissible negative limitations in patent claims? Permissible negative limitations in patent claims can include: Excluding an element or step that is not part of the invention Describing what the invention is not, to clarify its scope Distinguishing the invention from prior art The MPEP 2173.05(i) states: “If alternative elements are positively…
Read MoreHow are pending U.S. patent applications treated in terms of confidentiality and prior art?
Pending U.S. patent applications are generally kept confidential, but there are important exceptions and considerations: Most pending applications are preserved in confidence as per 37 CFR 1.14(a). Exceptions include published applications, reissue applications, and applications where public inspection has been granted. Applications with common assignees or inventors may be used for certain rejections, even if…
Read MoreDoes a PCT application need to enter the national stage in the U.S. to be prior art under AIA?
No, a PCT application does not need to enter the national stage in the United States to be considered prior art under the AIA. The MPEP clearly states: Thus, under the AIA, WIPO publications of PCT applications that designate the United States are treated as U.S. patent application publications for prior art purposes, regardless of…
Read More