How does In re Casey relate to material worked upon in patent claims?
In re Casey is another significant case discussed in MPEP 2115 that relates to material worked upon in patent claims. The MPEP summarizes the case as follows: In In re Casey, 370 F.2d 576, 152 USPQ 235 (CCPA 1967), an apparatus claim recited “[a] taping machine comprising a supporting structure, a brush attached to said…
Read MoreWhat are examples of claims that improve technology and are not directed to a judicial exception?
The MPEP provides several examples of claims that improve technology and are not directed to a judicial exception. These examples demonstrate how courts have found certain claims to be patent-eligible due to their technological improvements: Enfish, LLC v. Microsoft Corp.: Claims to a self-referential table for a computer database were found to be an improvement…
Read MoreWhat is the significance of the CTS Corp. v. Piher Int’l Corp. case in pre-AIA patent law?
The case of CTS Corp. v. Piher Int’l Corp., 593 F.2d 777, 201 USPQ 649 (7th Cir. 1979) is significant in pre-AIA patent law for its interpretation of the on-sale bar’s application to foreign activities. The MPEP 2133.03(d) cites this case to illustrate an important principle: “The same rationale applies to an offer by a…
Read MoreWhat case law supports the invalidation of the Old Combination rejection?
Several key cases support the invalidation of the Old Combination rejection: In re Bernhart: This case emphasized that statutory language is the proper basis for claim evaluation. The MPEP 2173.05(j) notes: “The court pointed out in In re Bernhart, 417 F.2d 1395, 163 USPQ 611 (CCPA 1969) that the statutory language (particularly point out and…
Read MoreWhat is the legal basis for considering expert skepticism in patent cases?
The legal basis for considering expert skepticism in patent cases stems from case law and is codified in the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP). The MPEP cites several key cases: Environmental Designs, Ltd. v. Union Oil Co. of Cal., 713 F.2d 693, 698, 218 USPQ 865, 869 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (citing United States v.…
Read MoreWhat is the significance of Ex parte Milton in relation to copied patent claims?
Ex parte Milton, 63 USPQ 132 (P.O. Super Exam. 1938) is a significant case cited in MPEP 710.04(a) regarding copied patent claims. Its importance lies in establishing the principle for determining the controlling date of the statutory period when claims are copied from a patent into an application with an existing unanswered rejection. The MPEP…
Read More