What is the purpose of the patent classification system?

The purpose of the patent classification system, as defined in MPEP 903.01 and 35 U.S.C. 8, is: “for the purpose of determining with readiness and accuracy the novelty of inventions for which applications for patent are filed.” In other words, the classification system is designed to: Organize patents and other relevant publications by subject matter…

Read More

How does the patent classification system contribute to the examination process?

The patent classification system plays a crucial role in the examination process, as outlined in MPEP 903.01 and 35 U.S.C. 8. Its primary contribution is: “for the purpose of determining with readiness and accuracy the novelty of inventions for which applications for patent are filed.” The classification system enhances the examination process by: Organizing patents…

Read More

What is the relevance of the novelty definition to the written opinion of the International Searching Authority?

The novelty definition provided in PCT Article 33(2) is also applicable to the written opinion of the International Searching Authority. This is explicitly stated in PCT Rule 43bis.1(b), which states that the provisions of Article 33(2)-(6) apply mutatis mutandis to the written opinion. This means that when the International Searching Authority prepares its written opinion…

Read More

Why is the concept of analogous arts important in patent examination?

The concept of analogous arts is crucial in patent examination for several reasons: It ensures a comprehensive prior art search that goes beyond the specific classification of the claimed invention. It helps in assessing the novelty and non-obviousness of an invention by considering relevant prior art from related fields. It prevents applicants from obtaining patents…

Read More

What does “anticipated by the prior art” mean in the context of novelty assessment?

In the context of novelty assessment for international patent applications, “anticipated by the prior art” refers to the situation where an invention is not considered novel because it has already been disclosed in the prior art. The PCT Article 33(2) states: “For the purposes of the international preliminary examination, a claimed invention shall be considered…

Read More