LAIPLALAIPLA
LAIPLALAIPLA
  • About
    • About LAIPLA
    • Ambassador Outreach Program
    • Board of Directors
    • Committees
    • Administration
    • Member Firms and Companies
    • Past Presidents
    • Recent Past Presidents
    • Public Service Award
    • Diversity Fellowship
    • Bylaws
  • Events
  • Membership
  • Sponsorship
  • IP Blogs
  • Contact
  • About
    • About LAIPLA
    • Ambassador Outreach Program
    • Board of Directors
    • Committees
    • Administration
    • Member Firms and Companies
    • Past Presidents
    • Recent Past Presidents
    • Public Service Award
    • Diversity Fellowship
    • Bylaws
  • Events
  • Membership
  • Sponsorship
  • IP Blogs
  • Contact

“State of the Art”: A Second Dagger to Void Viability of the Grace Period

May 25, 2016| in Wegner's Writings| by Hal Wegner

The controversy over whether an obvious modification of an invention published by a third party during the grace period is prior art is well known both from the analysis of Robert A. Armitage as well as the Patent Office interpretation of the Leahy Smith America Invents Act.

“State of the Art” is not Saved by the Grace Period:  But, there is yet another problem with the grace period: The “state of the art” to determine whether an invention is “obvious” under 35 USC § 103 is established as of the filing date (and not the invention date): On an a case by case basis this may destroy the value of the grace period.

Whither the Federal Circuit:  Until the Federal Circuit resolves issues surrounding the grace period under the Leahy Smith America Invents Act the safer filing strategy is to never prospectively rely upon the grace period.

Attached is an excerpt from the writer’s monograph explaining the situation, First To File Patent Drafting: A Practitioner’s Guide, § 2[a][6][C], State of the Art as of the Filing Date (pp. 108-113).

StateOfTheArtGracePeriodMay25

Regards,
Hal

IP Blog Categories

  • Announcements
  • Events
  • LAIPLA News
  • The TTABlog
  • Uncategorized
  • Wegner's Top 10
  • Wegner's Writings

Archives

Previous

Dow v. Nova Chemicals (con’d): Certiorari DENIED

Next

In re Aqua Products: Patentability Showing Required for New Claims in IPR


Since 1934, LAIPLA has been educating and connecting members of the local intellectual property legal community

Pages

About 
Events
Membership
Sponsorship
Contact
Privacy Policy

Search
Contact

LAIPLA
1621 W 25th Street
Box 633
San Pedro, CA 90732
Phone: (323) 285-1654
Fax: ( 310) 878-0517
Email: office@laipla.net

© 2023 Los Angeles Intellectual Property Law Association. All Rights Reserved | Website design by SafeHouse Web.