What types of evidence can demonstrate skepticism of experts in patent cases?
What types of evidence can demonstrate skepticism of experts in patent cases?
Evidence of skepticism of experts in patent cases can take various forms. According to MPEP 716.05, acceptable evidence may include:
- Expressions of disbelief: Documented statements from recognized experts expressing doubt about the invention’s feasibility or effectiveness.
- Published articles: Scientific or technical publications questioning the possibility of achieving the invention’s results.
- Industry reports: Reports or analyses from industry experts or organizations indicating skepticism about the invention’s potential.
- Correspondence: Letters or emails from experts in the field expressing their doubts or concerns about the invention.
- Testimony: Sworn statements or depositions from experts recounting their initial skepticism about the invention.
The MPEP emphasizes that “The skepticism must be directed to the invention as claimed and not merely to minor aspects of the invention.” This means that the evidence should show skepticism about the core concepts or main features of the invention, rather than just peripheral details.
It’s important to note that the evidence should be from the time period before the invention was made or proven successful. Retrospective skepticism or doubt expressed after the invention’s success is not considered relevant for demonstrating nonobviousness.
To learn more: