What is the significance of “at the time of the invention” in equivalence determinations?
What is the significance of “at the time of the invention” in equivalence determinations? The phrase “at the time of the invention” is crucial in equivalence determinations during patent examination. The MPEP emphasizes this temporal aspect: “[T]he examiner must … determine whether the assertedly equivalent element in the prior art or a reference would have…
Read MoreHow does the “time of invention” differ for AIA and pre-AIA applications in equivalence determinations?
The “time of invention” consideration differs for AIA (America Invents Act) and pre-AIA applications in equivalence determinations: For AIA applications: The relevant time is “before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.” For pre-AIA applications: The relevant time is “at the time of the invention.” MPEP 2183 notes: “For applications subject to the first…
Read MoreHow does the doctrine of equivalents relate to making a prima facie case of equivalence?
How does the doctrine of equivalents relate to making a prima facie case of equivalence? The doctrine of equivalents and making a prima facie case of equivalence are related concepts in patent law, but they apply in different contexts. The MPEP clarifies this relationship: “The determination of equivalence for purposes of the nonstatutory (obviousness-type) double…
Read MoreHow does the burden of proof shift in equivalence determinations?
The burden of proof in equivalence determinations shifts between the examiner and the applicant. The process typically follows these steps: The examiner establishes a prima facie case of equivalence. The burden then shifts to the applicant to show non-equivalence. If the applicant successfully demonstrates non-equivalence, the examiner must consider obviousness. As stated in MPEP 2183:…
Read More