How can an applicant demonstrate unexpected results in a 37 CFR 1.132 affidavit?
Demonstrating unexpected results in a 37 CFR 1.132 affidavit can be a powerful way to support patentability. MPEP 716.02 provides guidance on how to effectively present such evidence: ‘Any differences between the claimed invention and the prior art may be expected to result in some differences in properties. The issue is whether the properties differ…
Read MoreHow is commercial success evidence evaluated in patent cases?
How is commercial success evidence evaluated in patent cases? Commercial success evidence in patent cases is evaluated based on several factors: Nexus: There must be a clear connection between the commercial success and the claimed invention. Market share: The extent of market penetration is considered. Sales figures: Substantial sales can indicate commercial success. Growth: Rapid…
Read MoreHow should commercial success be demonstrated for inventions with claimed ranges?
For inventions with claimed ranges, it’s not necessary to demonstrate commercial success at every point within the range. Evidence of substantial commercial success at a typical point within the claimed range can be persuasive, especially if operation throughout the range is similar. The MPEP 716.03(a) cites a precedent: “Where, as here, the claims are directed…
Read MoreHow does the USPTO evaluate evidence of unexpected results in patent applications?
The USPTO evaluates evidence of unexpected results in patent applications based on several factors. According to MPEP 716.02: Any differences between the claimed invention and the prior art may be expected to result in some differences in properties. The issue is whether the properties differ to such an extent that the difference is really unexpected.…
Read MoreHow can publications be used as evidence in patent prosecutions?
Publications can serve as valuable evidence in patent prosecutions. The MPEP states: Publications may be evidence of the facts at issue and should be considered to the extent that they are probative and properly submitted. This means that applicants can use published articles, papers, or other documents to support their arguments against rejections or objections.…
Read MoreWhat is the significance of ‘statistical and practical significance’ in patent evidence?
When presenting evidence of unexpected results, MPEP 716.02(b) emphasizes the importance of both statistical and practical significance: “The evidence relied upon should establish ‘that the differences in results are in fact unexpected and unobvious and of both statistical and practical significance.’” Statistical significance means that the results are unlikely to have occurred by chance, typically…
Read MoreHow does skepticism of experts relate to nonobviousness in patent law?
How does skepticism of experts relate to nonobviousness in patent law? Skepticism of experts is a secondary consideration that can provide evidence of nonobviousness in patent law. According to MPEP 716.05, “Skepticism of experts is relevant to the issue of nonobviousness when the skepticism is directed to the invention as a whole, and not merely…
Read MoreWhat is the significance of commercial success in 37 CFR 1.132 affidavits?
Commercial success can be a valuable form of evidence in 37 CFR 1.132 affidavits to support patentability. MPEP 716.03 discusses the significance of commercial success: ‘An applicant who is asserting commercial success to support its contention of nonobviousness bears the burden of proof of establishing a nexus between the claimed invention and evidence of commercial…
Read MoreWhat types of comparative tests are acceptable for showing non-obviousness?
MPEP 716.02(b) provides guidance on acceptable comparative tests for demonstrating non-obviousness: “Evidence of unexpected properties may be in the form of a direct or indirect comparison of the claimed invention with the closest prior art which is commensurate in scope with the claims.” This means that both direct and indirect comparative tests can be used…
Read More