How does the Tarczy-Hornoch case relate to the “Mere Function of Machine” rule?
The Tarczy-Hornoch case is a significant legal precedent that established the “Mere Function of Machine” rule in patent law. According to MPEP 2173.05(v): “In re Tarczy-Hornoch, 397 F.2d 856, 158 USPQ 141 (CCPA 1968). The court in Tarczy-Hornoch held that a process claim, otherwise patentable, should not be rejected merely because the application of which…
Read MoreHow are inherent properties considered in patent examinations?
Inherent properties play a significant role in patent examinations and can be crucial in establishing non-obviousness. MPEP 716.02(f) cites the case of In re Zenitz, which states that “evidence that claimed compound minimized side effects of hypotensive activity must be considered because this undisclosed property would inherently flow from disclosed use as tranquilizer.” This means…
Read More