Out14-00

PATENT OUTLINE # 14

November 13-15, 2000

IV. Nonobviousness (Cont'd)

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)

F. Proof of obviousness

             1.     PTO - burden on PTO
             2.     Courts -- Federal Circuit says burden on party asserting
             3.     Presumption of validity - § 281
    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/

V. Novelty and Statutory Bars

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 prior 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 1-98
                X & Y use
                Z patents device
b.    Corset steel case, p. 924
c.    X invents 1-98, classified
          Z files 5-00
C.     Statutory bars       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)

	§ 102(a)	§ 102(b)
What?	Novelty	Statutory bar
Activity?	Known & used	Public use or sale
Who?	Someone else	Inventor or others
When?	Anytime before invention	More than 1 year prior to invention
Event?	Invention date	Application date

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

E. E. Miscellaneous statutory bars

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