tjrc
Newbie
Posts: 4
|
 |
Re: Oct 2003 Afternoon Question Help
« Reply #1 on: May 23rd, 2007, 5:58pm » |
 Quote  Modify
|
Testing. System rejecting my reply, thinks I'm including a URL.
Okay, that worked, let me modify with my actual response.
This is a "prophetic invention" (a term I never encountered before studying for the patent bar): one based only on theory and never actually experimented with.
The inventors, neither in their application nor in any associated filings, ever claimed that there were any actual experiments with the moon dust, and so never did anything to mislead the PTO.
I had some problem with this, too; as I read the question, it's very close to saying that Tip is not certain that there actually has been an invention, i.e. that the claimed invention actually can be made from the disclosure. In my practice sessions, I got this wrong, for that reason. But the actual fact pattern is slightly different. it does *not* say that Tip was concerned that the moon dust will not be effective; he's concerned that it would mislead the public into thinking it had been found to be effective.
I think if Tip believed the moon dust would not actually work, then he would be under an obligation to disclose, because that's material to patentability: if it doesn't work, there's no utility.
But his concern in the facts is only whether the public will be misled about whether actual experiments took place; and that is not material to patentability.
By the way, this question did come up on my exam (May 10).
|
| « Last Edit: May 30th, 2007, 2:34pm by tjrc » |
 IP Logged |
|
|
|
Forums
Help
Search
Members
Calendar
Login
Register
Reply
Send Topic
Print
Author
Remove