Ask Patents is a question and answer site for people interested in improving and participating in the patent system. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

This idea (us20140112139) is actually described in RFC6748, which was published as a draft on January 12 2012. IETF RFC6748 draft None of the "inventors" are listed in the RFC draft.

The idea is actually much older: ILNP website

Does this classify as prior art?

share|improve this question

Please note that prior art only means relevant information satisfying the priority constraint. The patent application's first claim is quite long and to invalidate this application with a single prior art document (e.g. the RFC), every aspect of the claim must be described in the document.

The IETF RFC6748 draft definitely is relevant to the claimed invention. And the applicant actually mentioned this RFC in their IDS filing to the USPTO, they actually acknowledged it is prior art. Yet, they believe the RFC draft doesn't restrict the novelty of their invention.

For the record, this invention was first filed in the US, then a PCT application was filed, with a search report drafted by the EPO. The EPO found more prior art, including a US patent and a US patent application, but only in category "A" (not particularly relevant).

share|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.