Scribd
Upload
18 views2 pages

Lecture 4-1-En

Uploaded by

fjam0994
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as TXT, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
18 views2 pages

Lecture 4-1-En

Uploaded by

fjam0994
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as TXT, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

[MUSIC PLAYING]

Hello and welcome back to introduction to intellectual property law.


Today's lecture is on patent novelty and non obviousness.
What we're going to do in this lecture is first talk
about patent novelty, what that requirement is-- the requirement
than every patent be new-- and then its close cousin,
statutory bars-- not quite the same as novelty, but a lot of commonalities.
And we'll discuss those.
And then the non obviousness requirement,
which really-- as we'll find out-- is the fundamental test
for whether a patent can be obtained or not.
So diving into novelty.
Novelty means that all inventions must be new.
They cannot be the same.
What we mean by the same is they cannot be anticipated as any pre-existing
knowledge.
And what we call pre-existing knowledge in a patent law is the prior art.
So part of this is patent jargon.
Anticipated means that you are not novel.
And prior art means pre-existing knowledge,
knowledge that came before the relevant date of the patent
or patent application.
A patented invention, when we talk about the invention,
we need to be clear that what we're talking about is the claim.
What is in the statute as the invention is really the claims
found at the end of the patent, as we talked
about in some of the earlier lectures.
And each patent claim in a patent is evaluated
for patentability and for infringement-- but for our purposes today
for patentability-- independently.
Which means it's possible that if you had-- for example-- 15 or 20 patent
claims in a patent document, which is an entirely typical amount, that it's
possible that five or 10 of them could be patentable
and the others might not be.
Each claim stands or falls on its own with respect
to validity-- and later on in the course we'll
find out with respect to infringement.
So when we talk about patent in inventions,
we're talking about an individual claim of a patent document.
So what novelty really means, if you want to break it down into a fairly
easy to remember phrase, is that your claim cannot be the same as the prior
art.
Your claim can just not be the same as the prior art.
So how do we go about figuring that out?
Well, there's a few steps.
Step one is the claim.
And here I have an example claim-- a writing implement
comprising a wooden cylinder with a hollow core,
a cylinder of graphite in the hollow core,
and a small cylinder of eraser material attached to one end.
You probably recognize this invention-- this invention is a pencil.
You should notice a couple things about a claim.
Claims are written as one single run-on sentence.
The way that the format works is you typically
have the elements of the claim separated into different lines,
but in general a claim is one sentence, a numbered sentence.
This is claim one that we're talking about here,
but if I had 20-- for example-- claims in my patent document
I would label them 1 through 20.
Each claim must be distinct and different,
which means it would have different words.
Each of the pieces of a claim-- each of the important components of a claim--
is known as a claim element.
So step one in any validity analysis, and including novelty,
which we're talking about right now, is to figure out what your claim is.
And you evaluate the claim as part one of the overall novelty question.
And then the next question ask is what is the same.
And as I noted before, when something is the same, what
we mean in the patent law-- what we call it in the patent law--
is that it has been anticipated.
And how do you do anticipation?
What anticipation means in the patent laws
is that each and every element of the claim
is predated or found in some piece of prior art.
So each and every element has to be found in the piece of prior art.
So in order to figure out whether our claim here-- our writing implement
claim-- has been anticipated we look to the prior art.
And see the prior art here-- prior art pencil.
So now the question is does that pencil anticipate our claim?
And by saying that, what we mean is, is each and every element of the patent
claim found in that prior art reference, found in the pencil reference?
Well let's go step by step.
First, there's a wooden cylinder with a hollow core.
You can see that that's a standard pencil component and it's there.
A cylinder of graphite in the hollow core.
Yes indeed, our pencil prior art reference
has a graphite cylinder inside the hollow core.
And then a small cylinder of eraser material
attached to one end of the wooden cylinder
is also there, which means that this particular claim on the left
is anticipated.

You might also like