What is the legal standard for establishing a prima facie case of anticipation or obviousness in product and apparatus claims?

According to MPEP 2112.01(I), a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness is established when: The claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or The claimed and prior art products are produced by identical or substantially identical processes This principle is supported by the following quote from…

Read More

How does the predictability of the technology affect obviousness analysis for species claims?

The predictability of the technology is an important factor in obviousness analysis for species claims. As stated in MPEP 2144.08: “Consider the predictability of the technology. If the technology is unpredictable, it is less likely that structurally similar species will render a claimed species obvious because it may not be reasonable to infer that they…

Read More

How do pre-AIA notions of obviousness apply under the AIA?

Generally, pre-AIA notions of obviousness continue to apply under the AIA, with some exceptions. The MPEP states: “Generally speaking, and with the exceptions noted herein, pre-AIA notions of obviousness continue to apply under the AIA.“ This means that many of the established principles and case law regarding obviousness determinations remain relevant under the AIA. However,…

Read More

What is the purpose of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(c)?

Pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(c) is designed to disqualify certain prior art for obviousness considerations under specific conditions. As stated in the MPEP, It is important to recognize that pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(c) applies only to consideration of prior art for purposes of obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103. It does not apply to or affect subject…

Read More