What is the difference between the exceptions in 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(1) and 102(b)(2)?

The exceptions in 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(1) and 102(b)(2) serve different purposes and apply to different types of prior art. Here’s a comparison: 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(1) Exceptions: Apply to disclosures that would be prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) Cover public disclosures made within one year before the effective filing date Include exceptions for inventor’s own…

Read More

How does common ownership affect prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C)?

Common ownership can significantly affect prior art considerations under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C). The MPEP states: “35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) excepts subject matter disclosed in a U.S. patent, U.S. patent application publication, or WIPO published application from constituting prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) if the subject matter disclosed and the claimed invention, not later than the…

Read More

What is the difference between AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(1)(B) and 102(b)(2)(B)?

AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(1)(B) and 102(b)(2)(B) provide similar exceptions for disclosures, but they apply to different types of prior art: 102(b)(1)(B) applies to grace period disclosures under 102(a)(1) (public disclosures) 102(b)(2)(B) applies to disclosures under 102(a)(2) (patent applications) The MPEP states: AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(1)(B) and 102(b)(2)(B) respectively provide that a grace period disclosure under…

Read More

How does double patenting differ from prior art rejections?

While double patenting and prior art rejections may seem similar, there are key differences: Double patenting compares claims, while prior art rejections compare claims to disclosures Terminal disclaimers can overcome nonstatutory double patenting but not prior art rejections Double patenting requires some commonality in ownership or inventorship Prior art exceptions may not apply to double…

Read More