The Intellectual Property Law Server

Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register.
May 26th, 2019, 6:45pm

Forums Forums Help Help Search Search Members Members Calendar Calendar Login Login Register Register
   Intellectual Property Forums
  
  
Obviousness
(Moderators: Forum Admin, JimIvey, JSonnabend)
   103 Rejection and "by another"
« Previous topic | Next topic »
Pages: 1 2 3  Reply Reply Send Topic Send Topic Print Print
   Author  Topic: 103 Rejection and "by another"  (Read 4985 times)
michael73
Newbie
*




   


Posts: 28
Re: 103 Rejection and "by another"
« Reply #5 on: Sep 12th, 2007, 12:15pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

I also received a 102 (b) and 103 (a) rejection for my invention (as discussed in length some time ago - thanks for the help again, btw!).
 
The rejections are based on my earlier application (>1 year before). Inventors are exactly the same. Does this change anything in terms of obviousness etc?
 
From the above thread, it seems that a 132 declaration (where would I find this?) would help?
 
Thanks... Michael
IP Logged
PA
Guest
Re: 103 Rejection and "by another"
« Reply #6 on: Sep 12th, 2007, 12:36pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify Remove Remove

If you're referring to swearing back, that's not available for 102(b) art.
IP Logged
michael73
Newbie
*




   


Posts: 28
Re: 103 Rejection and "by another"
« Reply #7 on: Sep 12th, 2007, 4:12pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

is it possible for 103(a)?
 
I am confident about our amendments and remarks regarding the 102(b) rejection, but the 103(a) is a bit more tricky.
 
The 103(a) rejection is based on our previous application + another prior art reference, from which the examiner takes an element to combine with our previous application. does patent law make it easier to "improve your OWN previous inventions", thus easier to pass 103(a)?
 
thanks Michael
IP Logged
PA
Guest
Re: 103 Rejection and "by another"
« Reply #8 on: Sep 12th, 2007, 4:36pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify Remove Remove

Quote:
is it possible for 103(a)?

If the art does not qualify under 102(b), then I think you can.
 
Quote:
does patent law make it easier to "improve your OWN previous inventions", thus easier to pass 103(a)?

No.  Imagine if a competitor could simply protect their invention across multiple 20 year terms by filing applications containing obvious improvements.  They would essentially be allowed a never ending monopoly.
IP Logged
michael73
Newbie
*




   


Posts: 28
Re: 103 Rejection and "by another"
« Reply #9 on: Sep 12th, 2007, 5:37pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

okay, I think I am starting to understand. I guess it doesnt help me Sad
 
102(b) seems to apply. our first invention was published 14 months before the filing of our current application. also, the examiner rejected some of our current claims based on 102(b).
 
thanks for the clarification!!  
cheers Michael
IP Logged
Pages: 1 2 3  Reply Reply Send Topic Send Topic Print Print

« Previous topic | Next topic »
Powered by YaBB 1 Gold - SP 1.3.2!
Forum software copyright 2000-2004 Yet another Bulletin Board