5

Would Bob need to obtain permission from Alice to use her patent? Yes, in the countries that Alice has a patent, Bob would need to obtain a licence before he could manufacture and sell his product. Would the practical result [of publication by Alice mean that the improvement] can no longer be patented by Bob? Yes, assuming it is sufficiently detailed so ...


4

There are three scenarios. These differ based on the time difference between the first patent application (EP1) being filed and the second patent application (EP2) being filed. EP2 is filed 18 months (or more) after EP1 In this case, EP1 will be published. There is no difference between your own publication and one by another party. If, in view of EP1, ...


3

Before we answer the question, you should be aware that the cited application US20140312193A1 is a full patent application and not a provisional application. Patent applications don't expire. Rather they are either granted or rejected. The definitive site to determine the status of a US patent application is the US Public Pair. For this case, get past the ...


3

Yes, you could apply for a patent for the new combination. However, it might be refused as being obvious. The expired patent (P1) which discloses the combination of painting oil and stone dust is prior art. This is true whether P1 is expired or not. Because of this, your invention would need to be non-obvious over P1. Since the only difference is the ...


2

I assume you're referring to EEC's suit against Google from a few years ago. EEC claimed Google infringed upon US Patent 5918244, claim 1 of which reads: A caching system comprising: a network; a plurality of computers interacting as a VMScluster on said network, each computer having a memory; a plurality of I/O devices connected to said ...


1

Provisional applications cannot claim priority to any earlier-filed applications of any type (provisional or non-provisional). But they are, as you mention, extremely useful in establishing an earlier priority date for a later-filed nonprovisional application. One strategy some low-budget clients pursue is to put everything in a single application--even if ...


1

You must introduce some novel aspect to that product' design. You would file for a patent on that novel aspect. If the novel aspect has not been discussed before you have a chance of receiving a patent protecting only that novelty. You would be able to control how that novel aspect is used. Whether you can market your product at all depends on the other ...


1

If your plan is to use company A's dispenser as-is, then you clearly can't get any apparatus claims. You might be able to write a patent with only method claims, on the order of: A method of dispensing [product B], consisting of the following steps: [ Steps to use dispenser A]. Unless you can show substantial differences between product B, and ...


1

The inventor could file a continuation-in-part application on the new invention. A continuation-in-part is a type of continuation application, but one where the new invention is not disclosed in the parent application and not claimed in the parent. (A simple continuation must be both disclosed in the parent and claimed in the parent.)


1

Well, obviousness is a tricky issue and at the core of (proper) examination work. Reams of case law exist on the issue. There is a fairly good introduction in the corresponding Wikipedia article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inventive_step_and_non-obviousness Beyond that, one would have to look at the exact wording of a given independent claim and evaluate ...


1

In general, once a product is legitimately sold in the U.S., the patent holder has exhausted any and all patent rights. The purchaser can do anything they like with the object. Exceptions would include situation where ownership doesn't transfer like packaged software. It is licensed with conditions. In oral arguments in a Supreme Court case the justices ...


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