Remove Invention Remove Inventor Remove Public Use Remove Reference
article thumbnail

The Inventive Entity and Prior Publication by Another

Patently-O

a) the invention was … patented or described in a printed publication … before the invention thereof by the applicant for patent, or. (b) b) the invention was patented or described in a printed publication … more than one year prior to the date of the application for patent in the United States, or.

article thumbnail

Key Points from the USPTO’s New Guidance on AI Use

IP Intelligence

Patent claims, for example, require that all claims have a significant contribution by a human inventor. One such approach would be to indicate which examples are “actual working examples” from inventors and which are “prophetic examples” drafted by AI. Therefore, while AI tools can be used to assist with forms (e.g.,

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

article thumbnail

The IPKat EPO Boards of Appeal Year in Review 2023

The IPKat

Another source of confusion is the divergent approaches of the UK courts and the EPO with respect to the test for the evidence standard in sufficiency and inventive step analysis. Readers looking for some clarity on G 2/21 may wish to skip straight to the recent referring Board's interpretation of G 2/21 in T 0116/18. Food for thought.

Invention 108
article thumbnail

“What’s Mine Is Not Yours To Give Me”—Nor To Take Without Just Compensation: A New Jersey’s Reaction To Sovereign Immunity, Intellectual Property, & Takings

LexBlog IP

And, it goes like this–the relevant concept in the United States is that a person shall “ no[t] be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.” Wright , 94 U.S. ”); James v. Campbell , 104 U.S. 2d 480 (Fed.