Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The analysis is thus essentially an obviousness analysis under section 103 of the patent law, [5] rather than (as it was in earlier times) an analysis of statutory subject matter under what is now section 101 of the patent law. [6] "Printed matter” is evaluated in a two-step test. [7]
The current version of the MPEP is the 9th Edition, which was released in March 2014. The MPEP has traditionally been available in paper form, but electronic versions are now used more often, particularly because an applicant only may consult the electronic versions while taking the USPTO registration examination, or the patent bar examination ...
35 U.S.C. § 103 describes the condition of patentability referred to as non-obviousness. This provides that a patentable invention must not have been obvious to a "person having ordinary skill in the art" (PHOSITA) in view of the appropriate prior art. The most important judicial decision in interpreting 35 USC 103 is Graham v. John Deere Co.
The examination is intended to measure the applicant's familiarity with USPTO procedures, ethics rules, federal statutes, and regulations. The applicant is allowed to use an electronic copy of the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP) in the computer-based examination (and historically had access to a paper copy of the MPEP for the pencil-and-paper test), but is strictly prohibited from ...
In United States patent law, an obviousness rejection based on a single reference. Generally a case for an obviousness rejection requires the examiner to rely on 2 or more references. Sandor Obviousness stems from Ex Parte Sandor Nagy [61] where the examiner relied on only a single reference to reject the claims at issue. Ultimately the case ...
Otherwise, the applicant may file an amendment which complies with the requirements set forth in the Office action. Reply to a final rejection must include cancellation of, or appeal from the rejection of, each rejected claim. If any claim stands allowed, the reply to a final rejection must comply with any requirements or objections as to form.
In United States patent law, the reduction to practice is the step in the formation of an invention beyond the conception thereof. Reduction to practice may be either actual (the invention is actually carried out and is found to work for its intended purpose) or constructive (a patent application having a sufficient disclosure is filed).
The Manual of Patent Office Practice (MOPOP) is a manual for patent agents and patent examiners, published by the Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO). It documents the procedures and practices relative to the prosecution of patent applications under Canadian patent law for patent examiners, applicants, agents, and the public at large.