How does the USPTO handle predictable versus unpredictable arts in written description evaluations?
How does the USPTO handle predictable versus unpredictable arts in written description evaluations? The USPTO’s approach to evaluating written descriptions differs between predictable and unpredictable arts. According to MPEP 2163.02: “The level of detail required to satisfy the written description requirement varies depending on the nature and scope of the claims and on the complexity…
Read MoreHow does the USPTO determine if the written description requirement is met?
The USPTO determines if the written description requirement is met through a case-by-case analysis. According to MPEP 2163.02: “The fundamental factual inquiry is whether the specification conveys with reasonable clarity to those skilled in the art that, as of the filing date sought, applicant was in possession of the invention as now claimed.” This assessment…
Read MoreWhat is the standard for determining compliance with the written description requirement?
The standard for determining compliance with the written description requirement is an objective one. As stated in MPEP 2163.02, the essential question is: “does the description clearly allow persons of ordinary skill in the art to recognize that he or she invented what is claimed.” This standard comes from the Federal Circuit case In re…
Read MoreWhat is the significance of the original disclosure in the written description requirement?
The original disclosure plays a crucial role in meeting the written description requirement. According to MPEP 2163.02: “The subject matter of the claim need not be described literally (i.e., using the same terms or in haec verba) in order for the disclosure to satisfy the description requirement.” This means that: The original disclosure serves as…
Read MoreWhat is the role of drawings in meeting the written description requirement?
What is the role of drawings in meeting the written description requirement? Drawings can play a significant role in satisfying the written description requirement. According to MPEP 2163.02: “Drawings constitute an integral part of the disclosure and may provide a sufficient written description of an invention as required by 35 U.S.C. 112(a).” This means that…
Read MoreDoes the written description need to be literal to satisfy the requirement?
No, the written description does not need to be literal to satisfy the requirement. As stated in MPEP 2163.02: “The subject matter of the claim need not be described literally (i.e., using the same terms or in haec verba) in order for the disclosure to satisfy the description requirement.“ However, it’s important to note that…
Read MoreHow can an applicant show possession of the claimed invention?
According to MPEP 2163.02, an applicant can show possession of the claimed invention in several ways: Describing the claimed invention with all of its limitations using words, structures, figures, diagrams, and formulas Description of an actual reduction to practice Showing that the invention was “ready for patenting” through disclosure of drawings or structural chemical formulas…
Read MoreWhat are some ways to demonstrate “possession” of an invention?
MPEP 2163.02 outlines several ways to demonstrate “possession” of an invention: Description of an actual reduction to practice Showing that the invention was “ready for patenting” Disclosure of drawings or structural chemical formulas that show the invention was complete Describing distinguishing identifying characteristics sufficient to show possession The MPEP cites several cases, including Pfaff v.…
Read MoreWhat is the “fundamental factual inquiry” in written description issues?
According to MPEP 2163.02, the fundamental factual inquiry in written description issues is: “whether the specification conveys with reasonable clarity to those skilled in the art that, as of the filing date sought, inventor was in possession of the invention as now claimed.“ This inquiry is based on the Federal Circuit case Vas-Cath, Inc. v.…
Read MoreWhat is the role of the examiner in assessing the written description requirement?
The examiner plays a crucial role in assessing whether a patent application meets the written description requirement. According to MPEP 2163.02: “The examiner has the initial burden of presenting evidence or reasoning to explain why persons skilled in the art would not recognize in the original disclosure a description of the invention defined by the…
Read More