How is a Certificate of Extension of Patent Term issued?
The process of issuing a Certificate of Extension of Patent Term involves several steps: The Director determines the patent’s eligibility for extension based on the application. If eligible and requirements are met, a certificate is issued under seal. The certificate is recorded in the official patent file. Notification of issuance is published in the Official…
Read MoreWhat is the difference between inventorship and ownership under Pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(f)?
What is the difference between inventorship and ownership under Pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(f)? Under Pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(f), there is an important distinction between inventorship and ownership: Inventorship refers to the person or persons who actually conceived the invention. Ownership refers to the legal rights to the invention, which may be assigned or transferred. The…
Read MoreWhat happens if a reexamination proceeding concludes without issuing a reexamination certificate?
If a reexamination proceeding concludes without issuing a reexamination certificate, such as when reexamination is vacated or the order for reexamination is denied, the patent owner can still request a correction of inventorship. According to MPEP 2250.02: “In some instances, the reexamination proceeding concludes but does not result in a reexamination certificate under 37 CFR…
Read MoreHow does inventor intent affect experimental use in patent law?
Inventor intent is crucial in determining whether an activity qualifies as experimental use. However, subjective intent alone is not sufficient. The MPEP states: “When sales are made in an ordinary commercial environment and the goods are placed outside the inventor’s control, an inventor’s secretly held subjective intent to ‘experiment,’ even if true, is unavailing without…
Read MoreDoes an inventor need to know their invention will work for conception to be complete?
No, an inventor does not need to know that their invention will work for conception to be legally complete. According to MPEP 2138.04, the inventor’s belief in the success of the invention is not a requirement for conception. The MPEP cites the following case: “Burroughs Wellcome Co. v. Barr Labs., Inc., 40 F.3d 1223, 1228,…
Read MoreHow is an invention “made” according to patent law?
In patent law, an invention is considered “made” when two key elements are present: conception and reduction to practice. The MPEP 2138.02 cites a specific case to define this: “An invention is made when there is a conception and a reduction to practice. Dunn v. Ragin, 50 USPQ 472, 474 (Bd. Pat. Inter. 1941).” This…
Read MoreHow does the complexity of an invention affect the proof of conception?
How does the complexity of an invention affect the proof of conception? The complexity of an invention can significantly impact the proof of conception in patent law. The MPEP 2138.04 provides insight into this relationship: “The conception analysis necessarily turns on the inventor’s ability to describe his invention with particularity. Until he can do so,…
Read MoreAre interviews allowed in inter partes reexamination proceedings?
No, interviews discussing the merits of inter partes reexamination proceedings are not allowed. According to MPEP 2685, “Pursuant to 37 CFR 1.955, an interview which discusses the merits of a proceeding will not be permitted in inter partes reexamination proceedings.” This prohibition applies to both inter partes interviews and separate ex parte interviews with either…
Read MoreWhat are intervening rights in patent reexamination?
Intervening rights in patent reexamination are protections granted to individuals or entities who have used or prepared to use a patented invention before the patent was amended during reexamination. These rights are defined in 35 U.S.C. 307(b), which states: “Any proposed amended or new claim determined to be patentable and incorporated into a patent following…
Read MoreWhat are intervening rights in inter partes reexamination?
Intervening rights in inter partes reexamination are legal protections granted to individuals or entities who have used or made substantial preparations to use a patented invention before the patent was amended or new claims were added during reexamination. These rights are outlined in 35 U.S.C. 316(b), which states: “Any proposed amended or new claim determined…
Read More