Abandonment of invention question

[UVAgal4]

Hello all.
If someone invents something a long time, say 10 years, ago and doesn't have money at the time to file for a patent but sends in something to the USPTO to basically just get acknowledgement that on X date he had said idea (I forget what this is called?), can someone who comes along later and file and obtain a patent for the same invention?
Let's assume that the first person took no further steps to develop, market, or publish his idea- the only place where it exists is in the USPTO vault.
Clearly, he has abandoned it, but does the new person have a right to the patent (assuming also that all dates of second person - conception, reduction to practice, etc. - are after and he has taken steps to market the invention)?
Thanks.

[klaviernista]

Can inventor #2 file a patent application claiming the invention?  Yes, provided that inventor #2 actually invented the invention and did not simply derive it (or steal it) from inventor #1, in which case inventor #2 would be barred by 102(f).

Can inventor #2 obtain a patent on the invention?  Possibly.  Many factors come into play.  Did inventor #1 publicly disclose the invention to others more than 1 year prior to inventor #2's invention and reduction to practice?  Is there prior art against the invention?  Despite the 10 year delay, could inventor #1 successfully argue that he was exercising "reasonable diligence" to file a patent application (MPEP 2831.06) (unlikely, but as I recall there was a case where the court found a similar delay was not "unreasonable").

[klaviernista]

Also, since the subject of this thread indicates that this is an "abandonment" question (the substance of the thread suggests otherwise), consider the following:

“The courts have consistently held that an inven­tion, though completed, is deemed abandoned, sup­pressed, or concealed if, within a reasonable time after completion, no steps are taken to make the invention publicly known. Thus failure to file a patent application; to describe the invention in a publicly disseminated document; or to use the invention pub­licly, have been held to constitute abandonment, sup­pression, or concealment.” Correge v. Murphy, 705 F.2d 1326, 1330, 217 USPQ 753, 756 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (quoting International Glass Co. v. United States, 408 F.2d 395, 403, 159 USPQ 434, 441 (Ct. Cl. 1968)).

See also MPEP 2138.03.

Best

-Klav