TwitterLinkedinSkypeRssEmail
+1.970.776.4355
BlueIron IP
  • About
  • IP-Backed Loans
  • Blog
  • All FAQs
    • Patent Loans
    • Patent Law FAQ
  • Contact
  • Schedule a Call

What constitutes a reduction to practice in the context of the on-sale bar?

By russ.krajec@blueironip.com | September 30, 2024

In the context of the on-sale bar, reduction to practice typically requires demonstrating the practical utility of an invention under actual working conditions. The MPEP states: Actual reduction to practice in the context of an on-sale bar issue usually requires testing under actual working conditions in such a way as to demonstrate the practical utility…

Read More

Is reduction to practice necessary to be considered an inventor?

By russ.krajec@blueironip.com | September 30, 2024

According to the MPEP, reduction to practice is generally not required to be considered an inventor. The focus is on conception of the invention. The MPEP states: “Difficulties arise in separating members of a team effort, where each member of the team has contributed something, into those members that actually contributed to the conception of…

Read More

How does reduction to practice affect the determination of inventorship?

By russ.krajec@blueironip.com | September 30, 2024

Reduction to practice plays a crucial role in determining inventorship, particularly in cases of competing inventors. The MPEP 2138.05 provides guidance on this matter: “The inventor of the subject matter of a patent is presumed to be the individual or individuals named as inventors in the patent. In order to rebut this presumption, clear and…

Read More

What constitutes a successful reduction to practice for a design patent?

By russ.krajec@blueironip.com | September 30, 2024

Reduction to practice for design patents differs from utility patents. The MPEP 2138.05 provides guidance on this topic: “In the case of a design patent application, the invention is reduced to practice when an embodiment of the design is created that allows a person skilled in the art to make an article embodying the design.”…

Read More

What is the “ready for patenting” test in the context of the on-sale bar?

By russ.krajec@blueironip.com | September 30, 2024

The “ready for patenting” test is part of a two-prong test established by the Supreme Court in Pfaff v. Wells Elecs., Inc. for determining whether an invention was “on sale” under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b). The test states that an invention is “ready for patenting” if either: It has been reduced to practice before the…

Read More

What does “ready for patenting” mean in the context of the on sale bar?

By russ.krajec@blueironip.com | September 30, 2024

The phrase “ready for patenting” is a key component of the two-part test established by the Supreme Court in Pfaff v. Wells Electronics, Inc. for determining whether an invention is “on sale” under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b). An invention is considered “ready for patenting” when it is either: Reduced to practice; or Depicted in drawings…

Read More

How does delay in filing a patent application affect suppression or concealment?

By russ.krajec@blueironip.com | September 30, 2024

The delay in filing a patent application can potentially lead to an inference of suppression or concealment, especially in interference proceedings. However, the MPEP clarifies: “Once an invention is actually reduced to practice an inventor need not rush to file a patent application. […] The length of time taken to file a patent application after…

Read More

How does the on-sale bar apply to inventions that have not been reduced to practice?

By russ.krajec@blueironip.com | September 30, 2024

The on-sale bar can apply to inventions that have not been reduced to practice if they meet the criteria established in the Pfaff test. Specifically: The product must be the subject of a commercial offer for sale. The invention must be ready for patenting. An invention can be “ready for patenting” even without reduction to…

Read More

Can the actions of a non-inventor contribute to reduction to practice?

By russ.krajec@blueironip.com | September 30, 2024

Yes, under certain circumstances, the actions of a non-inventor can contribute to reduction to practice through a concept known as “inurement.” Inurement allows the acts of another person to accrue to the benefit of the inventor. According to MPEP 2138.05, for a non-inventor’s recognition of the utility of the invention to inure to the benefit…

Read More

What is the legal definition of “conception” in patent law?

By russ.krajec@blueironip.com | September 30, 2024

According to MPEP 2138.04, conception in patent law is defined as “the complete performance of the mental part of the inventive act” and “the formation in the mind of the inventor of a definite and permanent idea of the complete and operative invention as it is thereafter to be applied in practice.” This definition comes…

Read More
« Newer Posts
Older Posts »

Search

Categories

Recent Posts

  • Stolen Valor: How Sleazy Patent Attorneys Abuse Inventorship
  • Four Horsemen of the Investor Apocalypse
  • AI-Assisted Patent Search Tools Exacerbate Inventor Biases
  • Your Patent Attorney Is NOT Giving Business Advice
  • Contempt from Crowdfunded Equity
  • Entrepreneurs and Imposter Syndrome
  • AI Startups: Protect Everything EXCEPT the Patent
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
  • Disclaimer
  • Privacy Policy
  • Media Kit
BlueIron IP | 1635 Foxtrail Drive, Ste 321 | Loveland, Colorado 80538 | USA