Meiresonne v. Google (Fed. Cir. March 7, 2017) stands for the proposition that a proper teach away argument to defeat of obviousness rejection requires a discussion in the prior art of more than just a preference away, disparagement or being critical of the combination suggested by the examiner to make the claimed invention. A proper teach away argument requires that the prior … [Read more...]
Patent application process
The patent application process includes three main time frames: 1) before filing patent application, 2) after filing a patent application and 3) after patent grant. Browse related articles below.
In Helsinn Healthcare v. Teva Pharmaceuticals (Fed. Cir. 5/1/17), the Federal Circuit held that under the America Invents Act (AIA), if the existence of the sale is public, the details of the invention need not be publicly disclosed for the on sale bar to apply. The Federal Circuit made clear that to the extent that the existence of an offer for sale of the invention is public, … [Read more...]
Summary A proper rejection on obviousness requires that the examiner show how one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine two or more prior art references to make the claimed invention. In Personal Web Technologies v. Apple (Fed. Cir. 2/14/17), the Federal Circuit held that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) failed to explain why a relevant … [Read more...]
For an examiner to reject a claim based on anticipation, each and every limitation must be found either expressly or inherently in a single prior art reference. An anticipation rejection is a rejection where the examiner is of the opinion that the claimed invention is not novel. However, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has taken a liberal approach to … [Read more...]
In the past few years software patent protection have come under intense scrutiny by the courts and the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). In that short time, it has become commonplace to see software inventions characterized as an abstract idea and thus not eligible for patent protection under 35 U.S.C. 101. As such, for software patent protection, one must … [Read more...]