Assuming the invention disclosed in a patent issued by the USPTO has been described in a book two years before it was submitted, can this patent still be invalidated by this prior art? If yes what is the procedure to follow?
Add a comment
|
3 Answers
Yes. An issued patent is presumed to be valid, but a challenger can produce prior art to demonstrate that the claims of the patent were anticipated or rendered obvious.
There are administrative post-grant procedures for challenging an issued patent, and, of course, anyone who is sued by a patent holder can support a defense of invalidity by producing prior art - even possibly art that was originally considered by the Patent Office when the patent was issued.
-
2There is some information related to the post-grant review process here: patents.stackexchange.com/questions/528/… Commented Oct 1, 2012 at 18:54
-
2I have also posted a comment that discusses mechanisms for challenging patent rights here: patents.stackexchange.com/questions/590/… Commented Oct 1, 2012 at 20:00
That said, the America Invents Act does create a new avenue for challenging patents, albeit a limited one. It allows third parties to introduce evidence of so-called “prior art” (proof the invention had already been invented) to block patents from being issued, and it also introduces a new framework to challenge patents in a “post-grant review” process.
-
There is a good description of the various post-grant proceedings, like PGR, IPR, CBM etc. here fishpostgrant.com/inter-partes-review– user8771Commented Jun 5, 2014 at 5:56
Here is a video of Tim Meyer explaining post-grant proceedings as of 2009. This is before the "new framework to challenge patents in a "post-grant review" process" so keep that in mind when watching it.