How does the USPTO determine if a disclosure is by the inventor or a joint inventor?
The USPTO determines if a disclosure is by the inventor or a joint inventor by examining the evidence provided and the circumstances of the disclosure. According to MPEP 2155.02: “The Office is not required to evaluate the sufficiency of the declaration or affidavit beyond ensuring that the declaration or affidavit addresses the subject matter of…
Read MoreHow do examiners evaluate the weight of secondary considerations in patent applications?
Patent examiners evaluate the weight of secondary considerations based on their relevance to the issue of obviousness and the amount and nature of the evidence. According to the MPEP, The weight attached to evidence of secondary considerations by the examiner will depend upon its relevance to the issue of obviousness and the amount and nature…
Read MoreHow does the USPTO evaluate the sufficiency of evidence in a 37 CFR 1.130(a) declaration?
The USPTO evaluates the sufficiency of evidence in a 37 CFR 1.130(a) declaration based on a preponderance of the evidence standard. The evidence must show that the disclosure was made by the inventor or joint inventor, or obtained directly or indirectly from them. According to MPEP 717.01(a)(1): The evidence necessary to show that the disclosure…
Read MoreHow does the USPTO evaluate the sufficiency of evidence in Rule 131 affidavits?
How does the USPTO evaluate the sufficiency of evidence in Rule 131 affidavits? The USPTO evaluates the sufficiency of evidence in Rule 131 affidavits based on several factors. According to MPEP 715.07, “In determining the sufficiency of any affidavit or declaration, a general rule of thumb is that facts, rather than conclusions, constitute evidence.” This…
Read MoreHow does the USPTO evaluate the sufficiency of evidence in a 37 CFR 1.130(a) declaration?
The USPTO evaluates the sufficiency of evidence in a 37 CFR 1.130(a) declaration on a case-by-case basis. According to MPEP 717.01(a): ‘The evidence necessary to show that the disclosure is by the inventor or a joint inventor or another who obtained the subject matter disclosed directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor…
Read MoreCan a single unexpected property overcome an obviousness rejection?
A single unexpected property may be sufficient to overcome an obviousness rejection, but its significance is crucial. The MPEP provides an example: “Evidence that the compound was unexpectedly nonaddictive was sufficient to overcome the obviousness rejection. Although the compound also had the expected result of potent analgesia, there was evidence of record showing that the…
Read MoreHow do patent examiners evaluate evidence of expected and unexpected results?
Patent examiners evaluate evidence of expected and unexpected results by weighing them against each other and considering their significance. The MPEP provides guidance: “Evidence of unexpected results must be weighed against evidence supporting prima facie obviousness in making a final determination of the obviousness of the claimed invention.” (MPEP 716.02(c)) Examiners must consider both types…
Read More