WHAT IS A PATENT?

Introduction What is a patent?  Simply stated, a patent is the exclusive right to prevent others from making, using or selling the invention or things made using the invention. Surprising?  See the following discussion. Discussion Technically, a patent does NOT give you the right to make use or sell the products of your invention since…

Read More →

OVERCOMING AN OBVIOUSNESS REJECTION

Introduction Rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 are the most common basis for an examiner refusing to allow issuance of a patent.  Section 103 outlines an improvement or modification that would be obvious to a hypothetical person of ordinary skill in the art is not patentable. I have already written on this topic, i.e., “overcoming an…

Read More →

103 Obviousness Rejections II

Introduction I am following up on my recent post Section 103 Obviousness Rejections pertaining to the 2018 USPTO Guidelines issued to USPTO examiner.  Recall that in 2007, the US Supreme Court broadened the basis for an examiner to reject a claim of a patent application on the assertion that the development subject of the claim was obvious…

Read More →

Section 103 Obviousness Rejections

Introduction Continuing with my discussion yesterday regarding rejection of patent applications based upon the examiner’s assertion that the claimed development is obvious, I am exploring the USPTO updated guidance to examiners published in early 2018.  An invention can not be patented if the development would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art at…

Read More →

Non-Analogous Art Can’t be Obvious

Introduction Many of my recent posts have been concerned with whether a development is eligible for patent protection.  This is a Section 101 question.  Recall that laws of nature, natural phenomena and abstract ideas without more are not eligible for patent protection.  Other hurdles of patenting are whether the development is novel (Section 102) or whether the development…

Read More →

Current Inter Partes Review

Introduction First, the AIA revised the prior Inter Partes Review practice discussed in an earlier blog. This blog pertains only to the new practice (post AIA).  You may also want to review my blog “Challenges to your Patent” Discussion Inter Partes Review can only be initiated after 9 months for the patent grant.  This is consistent with the 9 month…

Read More →

PATENTABLE INVENTION

Introduction As mentioned in Patent Application Elements, a development must be novel, useful and non-obvious to persons skilled or knowledgeable in the applicable technology or art.  The following descriptor the elements of a patentable invention. Novelty To comply with the requirement that the development be novel, the invention must not have been known or used…

Read More →