Remove Inventor Remove Law Remove Patent Law Remove Public Use
article thumbnail

Patent Law Canons and Canards: Bonito Boats

Patently-O

For our patent law course today, the students read the Justice O’Connor unanimous opinion in Bonito Boats, Inc. The Florida courts had refused to enforce the law because it conflicted with Federal Patent Law. The Florida courts had refused to enforce the law because it conflicted with Federal Patent Law.

article thumbnail

Can You Patent Your Idea?

LexBlog IP

Novelty: An invention or one very similar to it must already be patented, described in someone else’s patent or patent application, described in a printed publication, on sale, or in public use before the application date (with some exceptions granting the inventor a grace period of one year prior to the application date).

Patent 40
Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Trending Sources

article thumbnail

Celanese v. ITC: Can a Secret Manufacturing Process Be Patented After Sale of the Resulting Product?

Patently-O

The case has major implications for the relationship between patent rights and trade secret rights. Historically, an inventor could choose to protect a new manufacturing process either by patenting it or by keeping it as a trade secret – but not both. Compare D.L. Auld Company v. Gore & Assocs., Garlock, Inc. ,

Patent 40
article thumbnail

I was already like this before you got here: prior use as an exception to patent infringement

Garrigues Blog

In an earlier blog, we discussed “prior public use” as grounds for opposing the grant of European patents (see here ). In addition, a third party’s use of an invention before its registration by another is also relevant to assess patent infringement. The invention must have been developed and used in good faith.

article thumbnail

The IPKat EPO Boards of Appeal Year in Review 2022

The IPKat

Artificial intelligence is not breaking patent law: EPO publishes DABUS decision (J 8/20) ST.26 The Guidelines are, however, often out of step with current Boards of Appeal case law, and lag behind even the most uncontroversial of case law developments. 26 ( IPKat ).

article thumbnail

The IPKat EPO Boards of Appeal Year in Review 2023

The IPKat

PatKat reviewing the year It is time once more for the IPKat patent year in review! Pour yourself a glass of mulled wine, curl up with your favourite feline and catch-up on your EPO case law. Additionally, it is possible that the EPO wishes to connect the case law on plausibility with that on computer implemented inventions.

Invention 110