|
|
Author |
Topic: Invention Promotion Companies (Read 2644 times) |
|
Wiscagent
Full Member
Posts: 843
|
 |
Re: Invention Promotion Companies
« Reply #10 on: Jun 24th, 2006, 7:59am » |
 Quote  Modify
|
"Does the USPTO examiner also conduct a search for relevant prior art ?"
Asked and answered. Mike, what's your problem? You can't take YES for an answer?
Wallflowe wrote "Issued patents are presumed to be valid." That's true, but in terms of analyzing issued patents as prior art documents, generally irrelevant.
Richard Tanzer
|
|
 IP Logged |
Richard Tanzer
Patent Agent
|
|
|
wallflower
Junior Member
Posts: 96
|
|
Re: Invention Promotion Companies
« Reply #11 on: Jun 24th, 2006, 11:24am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Jun 24th, 2006, 7:59am, Wiscagent wrote:| Wallflowe wrote "Issued patents are presumed to be valid." That's true, but in terms of analyzing issued patents as prior art documents, generally irrelevant. |
|
By itself, maybe not. But the sentence is relevant as to the sentence following -- that the presumption is particularly strong over references that were before the Examiner during prosecution such as those cited in the IDS. When the OP asked whether the Examiner verifies references, I suspected the OP meant whether the Examiner is considered on the record to have looked at the references.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Wiscagent
Full Member
Posts: 843
|
|
Re: Invention Promotion Companies
« Reply #12 on: Jun 24th, 2006, 2:08pm » |
Quote Modify
|
Wallflower -
I was not as clear as I might have been. My point is this - If an examiner is examining a patent application and identifies a prior art reference - let's say 102(b) for simplicity - that anticipates the claim, it makes no difference whether or not that reference is a valid patent. In deed it need not be a patent at all. It is only required (assuming the date of the reference is appropriate and the document is a patent or "printed publication") that the document be enabling.
That's why the validity of the prior art patent is tangental to it's use as a reference against the present application.
Richard Tanzer
|
|
IP Logged |
Richard Tanzer
Patent Agent
|
|
|
mike
Newbie
Posts: 49
|
|
Re: Invention Promotion Companies
« Reply #13 on: Jun 24th, 2006, 2:28pm » |
Quote Modify
|
OK Rich, somehow I missed your reply.
Anyway .... "the OP".
What is "OP" ?
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Wolfcastle
Junior Member
Posts: 88
|
|
Re: Invention Promotion Companies
« Reply #14 on: Jun 24th, 2006, 4:11pm » |
Quote Modify
|
OP= Original Poster
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
|
|
Forums
Help
Search
Members
Calendar
Login
Register
Reply
Send Topic
Print