What constitutes a “ready for patenting” invention in the context of public use?
An invention is considered “ready for patenting” in the context of public use when it has been reduced to practice or when the inventor has prepared drawings or other descriptions of the invention that are sufficiently specific to enable a person skilled in the art to practice the invention. This concept is crucial in determining…
Read MoreWhat is the purpose of supplemental examination?
Supplemental examination is a process in patent law that allows patent owners to request the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) to consider, reconsider, or correct information believed to be relevant to their patent. This process is primarily used to address potential issues of inequitable conduct or other patentability concerns that may have arisen…
Read MoreWhat is the purpose of the enablement requirement in patent law?
The enablement requirement in patent law serves to ensure that the invention is sufficiently described to allow the public to make and use it. As explained in MPEP 2165.02: “The enablement requirement looks to placing the subject matter of the claims generally in the possession of the public.” This means that the patent application must…
Read MoreWhat is the purpose of 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph?
The purpose of 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph is to ensure that patent applications contain a full and clear description of the invention. As stated in the MPEP: “The requirement for an adequate written description ensures that the public receives something in return for the exclusionary rights that are granted…
Read MoreWhat is the purpose of citing prior art in an inter partes reexamination?
Citing prior art in an inter partes reexamination serves to bring relevant existing patents, publications, or other information to the attention of the USPTO during the reexamination process. This helps ensure that all pertinent information is considered when determining the patentability of the claims under review. According to MPEP 2602, “Citations by the patent owner…
Read MoreHow is the publication date of an electronic document determined for prior art purposes?
The publication date of an electronic document is crucial for determining its status as prior art. According to the MPEP: “Prior art disclosures on the Internet or on an online database are considered to be publicly available as of the date the item was publicly posted.” However, if the publication itself does not include a…
Read MoreWhat is the “public use” grace period under the AIA?
The America Invents Act (AIA) introduced a grace period for public use disclosures. According to MPEP 2152.02(c): “Under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b), an applicant was barred from receiving a patent if the invention claimed in the application was in public use in this country more than one year prior to the date of the application…
Read MoreHow is the public notified about patent term extensions?
The public is notified about patent term extensions through official publications: Regular extensions are published in the Official Gazette of the USPTO. Interim extensions under 35 U.S.C. 156(d)(5) are published in both the Official Gazette and the Federal Register. MPEP 2759 states: “Notification of the issuance of the certificate or order of extension will be…
Read MoreCan the Patent Trial and Appeal Board correct inventor names in a derivation proceeding?
Yes, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) has the authority to correct inventor names during a derivation proceeding. This power is explicitly stated in MPEP 2310.01, which cites 35 U.S.C. 135(b): “In appropriate circumstances, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board may correct the naming of the inventor in any application or patent at issue.”…
Read MoreHow does profit motive affect experimental use in patent law?
The presence of a profit motive does not automatically negate experimental use in patent law, but it can significantly impact how the use is perceived. According to MPEP 2133.03(e): “However, profit motive and experimentation are not mutually exclusive. The fact that the inventor may have some commercial goal does not necessarily negate an experimental purpose.”…
Read More