What is an affidavit or declaration under 37 CFR 1.130 and how can it overcome a 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection?
An affidavit or declaration under 37 CFR 1.130 is a sworn statement that can be used to overcome a 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection by establishing that a disclosure is not prior art. There are two types: Affidavit or declaration of attribution (37 CFR 1.130(a)) Affidavit or declaration of prior public disclosure (37 CFR 1.130(b)) MPEP…
Read MoreWhat is a joint research agreement under 35 U.S.C. 102(c)?
A joint research agreement under 35 U.S.C. 102(c) is a written contract, grant, or cooperative agreement entered into by two or more persons or entities for the performance of experimental, developmental, or research work in the field of the claimed invention. It allows certain prior art to be excepted or disqualified under specific conditions. The…
Read MoreHow does common ownership affect double patenting rejections?
Common ownership plays a significant role in double patenting rejections: Double patenting can occur between applications/patents with the same inventive entity, at least one common inventor, or common ownership Common ownership can be used to disqualify a reference as prior art under certain conditions For nonstatutory double patenting, a terminal disclaimer requires common ownership of…
Read MoreWhat is common ownership under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C)?
Common ownership under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) means that the subject matter disclosed and the claimed invention were owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention. This provision allows certain prior art to be excepted as prior…
Read MoreWhen does the 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) exception not apply?
The 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) exception does not apply in certain situations. According to the MPEP: The 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) exception does not apply to a disclosure that qualifies as prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) (disclosures publicly made before the effective filing date of the claimed invention). Additionally, this exception: Is not effective to remove…
Read MoreHow does the prior art exception under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) affect joint research agreements?
How does the prior art exception under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) affect joint research agreements? The prior art exception under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) can be particularly relevant for joint research agreements. According to MPEP 717.02(a): The exception under AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) applies if the subject matter disclosed and the claimed invention, not later than the…
Read MoreWhat are the requirements for invoking the AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) exception based on a joint research agreement?
What are the requirements for invoking the AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) exception based on a joint research agreement? To invoke the AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) exception based on a joint research agreement, specific requirements must be met. According to MPEP 717.02(b), the following conditions apply: Timing of the agreement: The joint research agreement must have…
Read MoreWhat is the grace period inventor’s disclosure exception in patent law?
The grace period inventor’s disclosure exception is a provision in patent law that allows inventors to disclose their invention within a specific timeframe without it being considered prior art against their own patent application. As explained in MPEP 717.01: AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(1)(A) provides that a grace period disclosure shall not be prior art to…
Read MoreHow does the examiner determine if a reference qualifies for the prior art exception under AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C)?
How does the examiner determine if a reference qualifies for the prior art exception under AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C)? The examiner follows a specific procedure to determine if a reference qualifies for the prior art exception under AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C). According to MPEP 717.02(c): “If the applicant provides a proper statement asserting common ownership…
Read MoreHow does an examiner evaluate evidence for an AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) exception?
How does an examiner evaluate evidence for an AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) exception? When evaluating evidence for an AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) exception, an examiner follows specific procedures as outlined in MPEP 717.02(c): The examiner will determine if the rejection is based upon a disclosure made by the inventor, a joint inventor, or another who…
Read More