Remove Art Remove Patent Application Remove Public Use
article thumbnail

Guest Post by Profs. Masur & Ouellette: Public Use Without the Public Using

Patently-O

What is it that makes a usepublic” for purposes of the public use bar? Does it matter whether the person doing the using is a member of the public, as opposed to the inventor? Or does it matter whether the use is itself in public, as opposed to taking place in secret behind closed doors?

article thumbnail

Confidentiality restrictions around clinical trials and prior public use (T 0670/20)

The IPKat

The question became whether the patients could be considered members of the public, and whether their participation in the clinical trial therefore constituted prior public use of the formulation. Critically, to satisfy the prior use test, it is not necessary to show that a disclosure has in fact taken place.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Trending Sources

article thumbnail

Federal Circuit Narrows AIA Grace Period: Public Disclosure Must Make Invention ‘Reasonably Available’

Patently-O

The basic holding is that the 102(a)(2)/(b)(2) safe harbor triggered by an inventor’s pre-filing “public disclosure” of the invention requires that the invention be made “reasonably available to the public.” ” Neither public uses nor private sales satisfy this requirement.

Invention 111
article thumbnail

Prior Art: The Patent Pitfall

Larson & Larson

A high number of patent applications are given a non-final rejection from the USPTO according to Yale. Often, the reason that the patent office will cite for rejecting an application is the presence of prior art. This makes the term ‘prior art’ an important concept for inventors to understand.

Art 52
article thumbnail

The Inventive Entity and Prior Publication by Another

Patently-O

And the Question : Does the prior publication count as prior art in an IPR obviousness analysis? = = =. Although the Board granted the petition, it eventually concluded that the prior publication was not prior art and thus sided with the patentee in its final written decision. a) Novelty; Prior Art.—A

article thumbnail

Yes, A Secret Process Can (Still) Create an On-Sale Bar

IP Tech Blog

The pre-AIA version of the §102 on-sale bar stated that a person shall be entitled to a patent unless “(b) the invention was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country or in public use or on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of the application for patent in the United States.”

article thumbnail

Yes, A Secret Process Can (Still) Create an On-Sale Bar

LexBlog IP

The pre-AIA version of the §102 on-sale bar stated that a person shall be entitled to a patent unless “(b) the invention was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country or in public use or on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of the application for patent in the United States.”