1. PATENT OUTLINE # 14
2. November 13-15, 2000

   C.     Subtests for nonobviousness, i.e., secondary considerations

            1.    Always considered -- see Stratoflex cited, p. 895

      2.    Long felt demand; commercial success; commercial
             acquiescence; professional approval, etc.

   D.    Combination of known elements

            1.     Unexpected result -- Adams, p. 880

            2.    HYPO:

                    X invents new slicer/dicer

                    Patentable?

                    X's invention also cooks the veggies

            3.    How strict the standard?  In re Soni, 54 F.3d 746 (Fed. Cir. 1995)

    E.     Design patents and nonobviousness

     1.     Designs must be not only nonobvious but ornamental

     2.     Ornamentality substituted for utility

     3.     See In re Finch, 535 F.2d 70 (C.C.P.A. 1976)

     4.     Tests

       a.     Inventive genius

     b.     Ordinary observer

     c.     Ordinary designer -- see In re Rosen, 673 F.2d 388
              (C.C.P.A. 1982)

      5.     Secondary considerations – see Avia Group International
              v. L.A. Gear Calif., Inc., 853 F.2d 1557 (Fed. Cir. 1988)

             1.     PTO - burden on PTO

             2.     Courts -- Federal Circuit says burden on party asserting

             3.     Presumption of validity - § 282

    G.     Scope of prior art

      1.     Relevant prior art

        a.     Pickle slicer

        b.     Analogous prior art
 

                1.     Dumb art problem

          2.    Product-function approach

          3.    Problem solving approach

          2.     Time frame for content of art  = time of invention
                   for § 103

          3.    Sources of prior art - refers back to § 102

                 a.    Section 102(a) -- prior knowledge or use; prior
                         patents; prior publications

                 b.    Section 102(g) -- prior invention in this country by
                         another

                 c.    Section 102(f) -- derivation from another

    4.    Level of ordinary skill

H.    BountyQuest   http://www.BountyQuest.com/

A.     Novelty = relative, not absolute

 1.     Acts in a negative fashion: if not new, not patentable

 2.     (New enough relates to nonobviousness)

 3.     Critical date

  a.     Section 102(a) novelty - prior art at the time of the
         invention

 b.     Sections 102(b), (c ) and (d) - events and acts by
         inventor or others prior to filing date

  4.     Patentable subject matter must distinguish over that already
          in the public domain by more than a mere advantage

    a.     Physical difference required

    b.     Difference need only be slight

 5.     Anticipation = antithesis of novelty

 a.     Classic test: "That which will infringe, if later, will
         anticipate if earlier"

 b.     HYPO:

        X invents and patents the lead pencil. Y invents and
        seeks to patent a pencil with the eraser attached.

        Does X’s prrior device anticipate Y’s?

 6.     Four corners doctrine

7.    Nonobviousness and novelty

  a.     HYPO:

         X files                    6-30-98

        A discloses           6-1-98

        Anticipation?

  b.    Add:

        B publishes         5-12-98

        C patent issues    8-16-98

        Anticipation?

        Obvious?

     B.    Determining novelty

1.    Known or used in this country

                    a.    Complete, reduced to practice (RTP)

        b.    Accessible to the public:   Test = whether person
                with ordinary skill in the art can find the reference

2.    Public vs. private and secret use

       a.    HYPO:

                X  invents "phone" 1-98
                X & Y use
                Z patents device

        b.    Corset steel case, p. 924
 

       c.     HYPO:

                X invents 1-98, classified
                Z files 5-00

                Described in document declassified 3-99
                Z files 4-00

                Is X first inventor?

        d.    HYPO:

                X  invents "phone"
                Puts one in lab, one in office
                Tape records messages to test

                Known or used?

                X discloses to paramour

          CC

                   1. 1

        1.    HYPO:

                A invents process for making silver glitter lipstick
                4 years later applies for patent

                Patentable?

                A sets up factory & produces small amount for sale
                3 years later applies for patent
                Patentable?

        2.     Public use

         a.     How much?

         b.    Beachcombers International v. WildeWood
                Creative Products Inc., 31 F.3d 1154 (Fed. Cir.
                1994)

        3.    On sale

                a.    Selling activity

                b.    Complete article of sale

                c.    HYPO:

                        X invents process for ballpoint pens
                        Discloses to Y in confidence
                        Y begins to use process

                                         X's patent issues
                                        Z, acquaintance of X, also starts to use
                                       X sues Z for infringement

                        Valid?

        4.    Comparison of  §§ 102(a) and (b)

5.    Experimental use
 
a. HYPO:

        X's process for red ballpoints does not work perfectly
        X hires company to use & improve results
        X applies for patent 5 years later

        Y uses process
        X sues Y for infringement

        Result?
 

b.    When does 1-year bar start to run?

       HYPO:

        X receives idea                1-1-97
        X thinks about it               1-1-98
        X experiments                  1-1-99
        X uses                                 1-1-00

c.    Reasonable purpose test

d.    How long can experimental period last?
 

e.     Not synonymous with secret use


f.     Cases

        1.    TP Labs v. Professional Positioners Inc., 724
                F.2d 965 (Fed. Cir. 1984)
 


        2.    Paragon Podiatry Lab v. KLM Labs. Inc., 984 F.2d
               1561 (Fed. Cir. 1993)

        3.    Experimental use & design patents -- Continental
                Plastic Containers v. Owens-Brockway Plastic
                Products, 141 F.3d 1073 (Fed. Cir. 1998)


D.    Sources of prior art

        1.    Patents

                a.    Effective as prior art as of filing date

                b.    HYPO:

                        A invents                2-17-98
                        B applies                2-10-98
                        A applies                5-20-98
                        B's patent               3-15-99

 
  c.     Foreign patents effective - date exclusive rights
           effective



2.    Printed publications

        a.    Accessibility

                1.     What qualifies as a printed publication?

                2.     In re Cronyn, 890 F.2d 1158 (Fed. Cir. 1989)

        b.     Handwritten manuscripts

                1.    Abandonment - § 102(c)

                        a.    Application

                        b.    Invention

                2.    Foreign patenting - § 102(d)

VI.    Priority

       A.    Original vs. first inventor

                1.    HYPO:

                        X rediscovers lost mummifying process

                2.    1st inventor = first to RTP

                        a.    Exception:  When 1st to conceive (C) is not 1st to RTP
                                may still be 1st inventor if reasonably diligent

                        b.    Must be 1st inventor unless prior inventor invents in
                                secret or abandons, suppresses or conceals invention

                        c.    Conception = mental part of invention; RTP = physical

                        d.    When exception applies

                                                                        X____________RTP
                                        Y   C________________________________RTP
                                                                    Y's diligence

            B.    Burden of proof -- interferences

                    1.    Senior party = 1st to file

                    2.    Junior party = burden

                            a.    Before patent issues = preponderance

                            b.    After issue = beyond a reasonable doubt

           C.    Reduction to practice

                    1.    Invention not complete absent RTP

                    2.    Actual RTP not required -- instead, the description must
                            enable one ordinarily skilled in the art to practice the
                            invention

                    3.    Actual vs. constructive

                    4.    Actual RTP demonstrates capacity of invention to achieve
                            its intended purpose

                            a.    Testing often the key

                                    1.    Not necessary to test in actual operating conditions
                                         Scott, p. 970

                                    2.    Lab tests may suffice
 

                            b.    Commercial feasibility not required

                            c.    Single successful use may be enough

                    5.    HYPO:

X invents speedboat testing device
X files                         6-6-99
Y files                         10-6-99

a.    To prove earlier RTP, party asserting must prove

b.    Corroboration required

        1.    Disinterested party

        2.    Appreciation

c.    Rule of reason approach -- Federal Circuit