Professor handout material as 102(b) prior art
In a post titled Patentee loses argument about "printed publication" in reexam appeal, AllThingsPros brings up the BPAI case of Ex parte i2 Technologies
The invalidating reference in question was handout material that was freely distributed to 600 students in a class. Additional copies were sold to anyone who asked. Further, the material (textbook) was cited in a number of journal articles and the material was sold to journal readers who contacted the professor about the material.
The patent involved is US 5,930,156, and the re-exam is 90/008,645. A relevant case is TypeRight Keyboard Corp. v. Microsoft Corp., 374 F.3d 1151, 1159 (Fed. Cir. 2004).
See previous IPBiz post on Klopfenstein:
CAFC uses an American Lawyer article as 102(b) art
The invalidating reference in question was handout material that was freely distributed to 600 students in a class. Additional copies were sold to anyone who asked. Further, the material (textbook) was cited in a number of journal articles and the material was sold to journal readers who contacted the professor about the material.
The patent involved is US 5,930,156, and the re-exam is 90/008,645. A relevant case is TypeRight Keyboard Corp. v. Microsoft Corp., 374 F.3d 1151, 1159 (Fed. Cir. 2004).
See previous IPBiz post on Klopfenstein:
CAFC uses an American Lawyer article as 102(b) art
posted by Lawrence B. Ebert at 6:42 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home