What are the four purposes of 35 U.S.C. 101?

According to MPEP 2107.01, 35 U.S.C. 101 has been interpreted as imposing four purposes: Limiting an inventor to ONE patent for a claimed invention Requiring proper inventorship Defining which categories of inventions are eligible for patent protection Ensuring that patents are granted only on inventions that are “useful” The MPEP states: “35 U.S.C. 101 has…

Read More

How does the USPTO handle enablement issues in drug-related patent applications?

For drug-related patent applications, the USPTO has specific guidelines addressing enablement issues. The MPEP 2164.06(a) directs examiners and applicants to additional resources: See MPEP § 2107 – § 2107.03 for a discussion of the utility requirement under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph, in drug cases. This reference to MPEP §…

Read More

What are the legal precedents relevant to the utility requirement in patent law?

The utility requirement in patent law is supported by various legal precedents. MPEP 716.08 directs readers to relevant sections for an overview of these precedents: “See MPEP § 2107 – § 2107.03 generally for utility examination guidelines and an overview of legal precedent relevant to the utility requirement of 35 U.S.C. 101.” These sections of…

Read More

What are the key components of the utility requirement in patent applications?

The utility requirement is a fundamental aspect of patent law, as outlined in MPEP 716.08 and related sections. The key components of utility are: Credible Utility: The claimed invention must have a believable use. Specific Utility: The utility must be particular to the subject matter claimed. Substantial Utility: The invention must have a significant and…

Read More