How does conception differ in unpredictable technologies?
In unpredictable technologies, such as some areas of chemistry and biology, the process of conception can differ from more predictable fields. According to MPEP 2138.04, in these areas, conception and reduction to practice may occur simultaneously:
“On rare occasions conception and reduction to practice occur simultaneously in unpredictable technologies. Alpert v. Slatin, 305 F.2d 891, 894, 134 USPQ 296, 299 (CCPA 1962). ‘[I]n some unpredictable areas of chemistry and biology, there is no conception until the invention has been reduced to practice.'”
This means that in highly unpredictable fields, an inventor might not be able to form a complete mental picture of the invention until they have actually created or performed it. The MPEP provides an example:
“Hitzeman v. Rutter, 243 F.3d 1345, 58 USPQ2d 1161 (Fed. Cir. 2001) (conception simultaneous with reduction to practice where appellant lacked reasonable certainty that yeast’s performance of certain intracellular processes would result in the claimed antigen particles)”
In these cases, conception is not considered complete if subsequent experimentation reveals uncertainties that undermine the specificity of the inventor’s idea. This approach recognizes the unique challenges in unpredictable fields where the outcome of an invention may not be fully known until it is actually reduced to practice.
To learn more: