How does the USPTO handle situations where the requirements for the AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) exception are not fully met?
How does the USPTO handle situations where the requirements for the AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) exception are not fully met? When the requirements for invoking the AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) exception are not fully met, the USPTO follows a specific procedure. According to MPEP 717.02(b): “If the requirements have not been met, the examiner will…
Read MoreHow does the USPTO evaluate if the prior art exception under AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) is properly invoked?
How does the USPTO evaluate if the prior art exception under AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) is properly invoked? The USPTO evaluates whether the prior art exception under AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) is properly invoked by examining the evidence provided by the applicant. According to MPEP 717.02(b): “The applicant may invoke this exception by filing a…
Read MoreWhen were public use proceedings discontinued by the USPTO?
Public use proceedings were discontinued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) on September 16, 2012. The MPEP clearly states: Effective September 16, 2012, former 37 CFR. 1.292 authorizing petitions seeking institution of public use proceedings was removed from title 37. This change was part of broader reforms to the U.S. patent system…
Read MoreWhat is the 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) exception?
The 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) exception is a prior art exception that can be invoked to disqualify certain disclosures as prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2). As stated in the MPEP: It is important to recognize that the 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) exception can only be invoked in regard to a disclosure that is applied in a…
Read MoreWhat are the different types of prior art rejections under 35 U.S.C. 102?
What are the different types of prior art rejections under 35 U.S.C. 102? Under 35 U.S.C. 102, there are several types of prior art rejections that patent examiners can use. According to MPEP 706.02, the main types are: 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) rejections: Based on public disclosures before the effective filing date 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) rejections:…
Read MoreWhat types of affidavits or declarations can be filed under 37 CFR 1.130?
Under 37 CFR 1.130, two types of affidavits or declarations can be filed: Affidavit or declaration of attribution (37 CFR 1.130(a)): This is used to establish that a disclosure was made by the inventor or joint inventor, or that the subject matter disclosed was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or joint inventor. Affidavit…
Read MoreWhat are the time periods for submitting an amendment to disclose parties to a joint research agreement?
According to 37 CFR 1.71(g)(2), an amendment to disclose the names of the parties to a joint research agreement must be accompanied by the processing fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(i) if not filed within one of the following time periods: Within three months of the filing date of a national application; Within three…
Read MoreWhat is the ‘shielding effect’ in AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(1)(B) and how does it work?
What is the ‘shielding effect’ in AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(1)(B) and how does it work? The ‘shielding effect’ in AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(1)(B) is a powerful protection for inventors who publicly disclose their invention before filing a patent application. According to MPEP 717: “AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(1)(B) provides that a disclosure which would otherwise qualify…
Read MoreWhat are the requirements for invoking the joint research agreement provisions of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C)?
To invoke the joint research agreement provisions of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C), an applicant must: Amend the specification to disclose the names of the parties to the joint research agreement, if not already disclosed, in accordance with 37 CFR 1.71(g). Submit the required statement to invoke the prior art exception. According to the MPEP, this statement…
Read MoreWhat replaced public use proceedings in the patent examination process?
While the MPEP section 720 doesn’t directly address what replaced public use proceedings, it’s important to understand the context of their removal. Public use proceedings were discontinued as part of the America Invents Act (AIA) reforms to the U.S. patent system. The AIA introduced new post-grant proceedings that serve similar purposes to the former public…
Read More