3

To obtain a patent for an invention, it should pass through various toll gates such as a)Novelty b)Obviousness c)Enablement d)subject matter and e)Industrial application. In order to overcome the novelty criteria, the invention should be new.It should not be available in the public domain prior to filing for a patent.Such law relating to novelty is ...


2

An answer to the question in your title is at How do others' publications during the grace period hinder patentability? As interpreted by the USPTO the provisions for a grace period in the AIA protects the content of the inventor's publications (during the 12 month period) from being used against them on a very literal basis. Anything from a third party ...


2

I'll try to clarify. Under the AIA first to file system, the effective filing date of the pending application is important for figuring out what is in the prior art. The law (35 USC 102) is now set up such that it broadly defines the class of prior art and then carves out specific exceptions that can be used to disqualify references (publications or patent ...


1

Either a provisional or a non-provisional application can be used. But remember, any application is only as good as what it contains. If you take "provisional" to be "very sparse on depth and breadth" then it may not do the job. But it isn't the difference between provisional and non provisional, it is the difference between a complete discourse and a poor ...


1

It always did until the AIA law went into effect. Now the law says: " PRIOR ART.—A person shall be entitled to a patent unless— (1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention;" If the italicized phrase ...


1

Interesting question. “Only an offer which rises to the level of a commercial offer for sale, one which the other party could make into a binding contract by simple acceptance (assuming consideration), constitutes an offer for sale under [35 USC] §102(b).” Group One, Ltd. v. Hallmark Cards, Inc., 254 F.3d 1041,1048 (Fed. Cir. 2001). However, “[i]t is not ...


1

In the past this would be a public use and maybe a public commercial use even if no information was determinable from the outside. The AIA law probably changed this so a "non-informing use" doesn't start the clock. Until a few cases get to court it is not 100% clear.


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible