3 ms·
Wouldn't an invalid patent still be considered prior art?
by squozzer 8y ago
Wouldn't an invalid patent still be considered prior art?
- gumby 8y agoNot by the USPTO's peculiar definition of what constitutes prior art.
- isthatart 8y ago... and if in doubt you'd better call Saul!
- monochromatic 8y ago.
- CobrastanJorji 8y agoSo Invalid patents are prior art, but content in valid patents outside of the claims section is NOT prior art?
- monochromatic 8y agohttp://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/opinions-orders/16-2388.Opinion.12-8-2017.1.PDF http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/opinions-or...
- gumby 8y agoThat is not at all clear to me, on two grounds. Indeed 35 U.S.C. 102(a) does say that a prior patent or non-recent application (which would naturally be the case for an issued patent, whether the patent was invalidated or not -- it clearly had an application) count as prior art. However if the patent is invalidated does it count as issued? I'm not sure under _Stalego_ that it does. As for the applications, regardless of the text of the US code, also under _Stalgeo_ cancelled matter in the application (but weirdly, not in the wrapper!) is inadmissible, and presumably the subject of the application is itself cancelled, per code, rather than abandoned. Patent law is super arcane and I do not practice in that area specifically but I would be surprised if the people who down voted my comment (to which you are replying) are really steeped in the peculiar minutiae of the operation of the PTO.