Powered by
TTSReader
Share this page on
Article provided by Wikipedia


Main article: "Public participation in patent examination

With the advent of the "Internet, a number of initiatives have been undertaken to create a forum where the public at large can participate in prior art searches. These forums have been related to both issued patents and pending patent applications.

Pending patent applications[edit]

More recently, different attempts to employ open Internet-based discussions for encouraging public participation commenting on pending U.S. applications have been started. These may take the form of a "wiki:

Patent examiners often use the online encyclopedia "Wikipedia as a reference to get an overall feel for a given subject.[14][15] Citations of Wikipedia as actual prior art can be problematic, however, due to the fluid and open nature of its editing, and Patents Commissioner Doll said the agency used Wikipedia entries as background and not as a basis for accepting or rejecting an application.[15]

See also[edit]

Notable prior art databases[edit]

For other patent search services, see "Category:Patent search services.

References[edit]

  1. ^ Sreenivasulu, N. S.; Raju, C. B. (2008). Biotechnology and Patent Law: Patenting Living Beings. Manupatra. p. 95. "ISBN "9788189542313. The European Patent Convention uses the term 'state of the art' which is equivalent to prior art (...) 
  2. ^ "The expression 'background art' ... must have the same meaning as the more familiar expression 'prior art'" in EPO Board of appeal decision T 11/82 of 15 April 1983, Headnote II and Reasons 15. See also Rule 42(1)(b) and(c) "EPC (previously Rule 27(1)(b) and (c) "EPC 1973, where the term is used).
  3. ^ See for example Article 54(2) "EPC and "35 U.S.C. § 102
  4. ^ Graham v. John Deere Co. of Kansas City, 383 US 1, Sup. Ct., 1966.
  5. ^ Tokai Corp. v. Easton Enterprises, Inc., 632 F. 3d 1358 at 1363-64, Ct. App. (Fed. Cir.), 2011.
  6. ^ Mark Nowotarski, “Why Inventors Should Not Rely On Their Own Search”, IPWatchdog, 11 October 2014
  7. ^ USPTO, Manual of Patent Examining Procedure, General Search Guidelines [R-3] - 900 Prior Art, Classification, and Search, July 2010.
  8. ^ Nowotarski, Mark (July 2012). "Patent Invalidity Search". Insurance IP Bulletin. Retrieved March 1, 2013. 
  9. ^ Therasense, Inc. v. Becton, Dickinson and Co., 649 F. 3d 1276, Ct. App. (Fed. Cir.), 2011.
  10. ^ Patent e-Bulletin, Summer '2002 Developments: Following The United States, Japan And Australia Enact Duty Of Disclosure Requirements, Gastle & Associates (through archive.org)
  11. ^ See also Japan's Examination Guidelines for Patent and Utility Model in Japan, Examination Standards Office, December 2011; and Japan's Right Obtainment Procedures.
  12. ^ Japan Patent Office, Publication of the "Examination Guidelines on Requirement for Disclosure of Information on Prior Art Documents", Last updated 30 August 2002.
  13. ^ Australian Patent Office Manual of Practice and Procedure, 2.13.10 Considering Subsection 45(3) Search Results, 2011-08-15.; see also Changes to regulations made under sections of the Patents Act 1990, (sections 27(1), 45(3) and 101D) Australian Official Journal of Patents, 2007-11-01.
  14. ^ Office of the Chief Information Officer, Secure Application Development Coding Policy OCIO, USPTO, May 22, 2009.
  15. ^ a b USPTO Bans Wikipedia, The Patent Librarian's Notebook, 2006-09-10, citing Stead, Deborah, Up Front: Kicking Wiki Out Of The Patent Office, Bloomberg Business Week, 2006-09-04.
  16. ^ All Things Pros blog, Board decisions involving the Wayback Machine to show status as prior art (Part I), Sunday, December 29, 2013
  17. ^ The Wayback Machine: The State of Dating Online Materials, Intellogist patent research blog, Posted February 1, 2011 by Chris Jagalla

Further reading[edit]

External links[edit]

Official institutions[edit]

) )