Invalidating a patent with prior art who is joe wright dating

Jones was published on January 1, 2010 as evident by the filing date of Jones, while the current application was filed December 31, 2009.patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention” or “the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention” as required under 35 USC 102.

invalidating a patent with prior art-22

Invalidating a patent with prior art

If the publication date of the cited art is after your filing date, then the cited art cannot be used as a prior art reference.

However, the publication date of a reference may not be when the material was “on sale” or “in public use,” which is harder to prove.

In view of the above, Jones does not disclose “limitations A-C” of independent claim 1, and independent claim 1 is allowable.

Furthermore, the other independent claims are allowable at least for somewhat similar reasons as independent claim 1 and on their own merits, and the dependent claims are allowable by virtue of their dependency from an allowable base claim.

In view of the above, Applicant respectfully request Jones is not proper cited art, and withdrawal of this rejection is respectfully requested.

In 35 USC 102 rejections, a single cited art reference must disclose each and every claimed limitation.

For at least the following reasons, Applicant respectfully disagrees.

Jones discloses (insert high level overview of Jones). lines 1-5 of Jones discloses “x,y,z,” however x,y,z is not “limitations of A-C” of independent claim 1.

(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention; or (2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122 (b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.

(1) Disclosures made 1 year or less before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.— A disclosure made 1 year or less before the effective filing date of a claimed invention shall not be prior art to the claimed invention under subsection (a)(1) if— (B) the subject matter disclosed had, before such disclosure, been publicly disclosed by the inventor or a joint inventor or another who obtained the subject matter disclosed directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor.

Sometimes an Examiner’s understanding of the claims and/or the cited art is different than yours.

Tags: , ,