How does the AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B) exception handle genus-species relationships?

The AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B) exception has specific rules for handling genus-species relationships between the inventor’s prior disclosure and the intervening U.S. patent document. The MPEP provides clear guidance on this:

1. Species disclosed by inventor, genus in intervening document: “If the inventor or a joint inventor had publicly disclosed a species, and a subsequent intervening U.S. patent document discloses a genus (i.e., provides a more generic disclosure of the species), the disclosure of the genus in the intervening U.S. patent document is not available as prior art under AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2).“
2. Genus disclosed by inventor, species in intervening document: “Conversely, if the inventor or a joint inventor had publicly disclosed a genus, and a subsequent intervening U.S. patent document discloses a species, the disclosure of the species in the subsequent intervening U.S. patent document would be available as prior art under AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2).“
3. Species disclosed by inventor, alternative species in intervening document: “Likewise, if the inventor or a joint inventor had publicly disclosed a species, and a subsequent intervening U.S. patent document discloses an alternative species not also disclosed by the inventor or a joint inventor, the disclosure of the alternative species in the intervening U.S. patent document would be available as prior art under AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) because the ‘subject matter disclosed’ requirement of AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B) would not have been met.“

These rules ensure that the exception protects inventors from overly broad subsequent disclosures while still allowing for genuine new inventions within the same field.

To learn more:

• AIA
• prior art exception
• genus-species
• public disclosure