What is the significance of In re Wiggins in patent law?
In re Wiggins is a significant case in patent law that clarifies the role of secondary considerations in different types of patent rejections. The case is cited in MPEP 2131.04, which states: “Evidence of secondary considerations, such as unexpected results or commercial success, is irrelevant to 35 U.S.C. 102 rejections and thus cannot overcome a…
Read MoreWhat is the significance of the In re Wands case in patent law?
The In re Wands case (858 F.2d 731, Fed. Cir. 1988) is significant in patent law because it established the factors used to determine whether a disclosure satisfies the enablement requirement. As stated in MPEP 2164.01(a): “In Wands, the court noted that there was no disagreement as to the facts, but merely a disagreement as…
Read MoreWhat is the significance of the In re Elsner case for plant patents?
The In re Elsner case, as discussed in MPEP 2121.03, is significant for plant patents as it establishes criteria for when a combination of facts and events can constitute a statutory bar under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b). The MPEP states: “The court held that when (i) a publication identifies claimed the plant, (ii) a foreign…
Read MoreHow can an applicant suggest an interference with another application or patent?
An applicant, including a reissue applicant, can suggest an interference with another application or patent by providing sufficient information to identify the other application or patent. According to 37 CFR 41.202(a)(1), the suggestion must: “Provide sufficient information to identify the application or patent with which the applicant seeks an interference” Typically, this involves providing the…
Read MoreWhat is the “Hogan” principle in patent enablement?
What is the “Hogan” principle in patent enablement? The “Hogan” principle is a key concept in patent enablement, derived from the case In re Hogan. According to MPEP 2164.05(a), this principle states that “a disclosure should be evaluated for enablement as of the filing date, and that later developed or after-invented technology cannot be used…
Read MoreWhat happens if fraud is suspected during reexamination or supplemental examination?
If fraud is suspected during reexamination or supplemental examination, the USPTO has specific procedures in place. For reexamination proceedings, MPEP 2014 states: “Any fraud practiced or attempted on the Office or any violation of the duty of disclosure through bad faith or intentional misconduct by any such individual results in noncompliance with 37 CFR 1.555(a).…
Read MoreHow does the USPTO handle potential fraud discovered during supplemental examination?
The USPTO has specific procedures for handling potential fraud discovered during supplemental examination. The MPEP explains: “In accordance with 35 U.S.C. 257(e), if the Office becomes aware, during the course of a supplemental examination or ex parte reexamination ordered under 35 U.S.C. 257, that a material fraud on the Office may have been committed in…
Read MoreHow are amendments handled in inter partes reexamination proceedings?
Amendments in inter partes reexamination proceedings are handled as follows: Amendments should be submitted in proper form If appropriate, amendments will be entered for the reexamination proceeding, even if they don’t have legal effect until the certificate is issued “New matter” amendments to the disclosure will be required to be canceled Claims containing new matter…
Read MoreWhat are the grounds for vacating an ex parte reexamination order?
An ex parte reexamination order may be vacated under rare and specific circumstances. According to MPEP 2246, “appropriate circumstances” for vacating an order under 37 CFR 1.181(a)(3) include: The reexamination order is not based on prior art patents or printed publications All claims of the patent were held invalid by a final federal court decision…
Read MoreWhat is the significance of “Full Scope Enablement” in patent law?
What is the significance of “Full Scope Enablement” in patent law? “Full Scope Enablement” is a crucial concept in patent law that ensures the inventor has provided sufficient information to enable the entire scope of the claimed invention. According to MPEP 2164.08: “All questions of enablement are evaluated against the claimed subject matter. The focus…
Read More