遇到引用自己的前申請案/專利案核駁理由怎麼辦？
一點點參考：同一發明人的前後申請案（http://enpan.blogspot.tw/2011/03/blog-post_449.html）。
AIA之前，因為隱含「發明日」的考量，可以排除自己的前案為引證案。
就AIA新法規定「自己」可說是發明人、共同發明人，或是間接或直接自發明人、共同發明人取得揭露內容的人，但是就「有效申請日」為基準，原則上就給了一年寬限。
AIA後的35U.S.C.102：
http://www.bitlaw.com/source/35usc/102.html
http://enpan.blogspot.tw/2012/10/aia102.html
MPEP 706.02(a)(1)規範如何適用35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)（較早揭露）或102(a)(2)（較早申請）。
MPEP 706.02(a)(1)適用美國專利法為AIA修法之後（MPEP 706.02(a)(2)為AIA之前），因此也僅適用修法後才提出申請的專利申請案，
面對「AIA修法後（2013年3月16日之後申請案。若主張2013/3/16前優先權，適用舊法）申請案」，審查委員將以新法審查，也就是適用102(a)(1)、102(a)(2)與102(b)(1)、102(b)(2)的例外條款。
- 適格的先前技術（102(a)(1)）：在審查中專利有效申請日（effective filing date）之前的專利、公開文獻、公開使用、販售與其他提供給公眾的事由。（所述販售或公開使用不一定要發生在美國本土）
（以下可稱新穎性優惠期、寬限期）
- 例外不適用先前技術（102(b)(1)(A)）：不為先前技術的條件是：(1)有效申請日前一年內的揭露內容；以及(2)這些揭露是由發明人自己、共同發明人，或其他直接或間接自發明人或共同發明人取得的發明的揭露內容。
102(b)(1)(A)
if the disclosure was made: (1) One year or less before the effective filing date of the claimed invention; and (2) by the inventor or a joint inventor, or by another who obtained the subject matter directly or indirectly from the inventor or joint inventor.
- 例外不適用先前技術（102(b)(1)(B)）：不為先前技術的條件是：(1)有效申請日前一年內的揭露內容；以及(2)在早先已經由發明人自己、共同發明人，或其他直接或間接自發明人或共同發明人取得的發明的公開揭示（"previously publicly disclosed"）。
102(b)(1)(B)
may be disqualified as prior art if: (1) The disclosure was made one year or less before the effective filing date of the claimed invention; and (2) the subject matter disclosed had been previously publicly disclosed by the inventor, a joint inventor, or another who obtained the subject matter directly or indirectly from the inventor or joint inventor.
（以上兩點例外條款文字很像，差異在，前者指有效申請日前一年內"自己人的揭露"，後者指有效申請日前一年內"比其他揭露更早的自己人的公開內容"。前者可指先前的"尚未公開"的專利申請案或文獻，後者則是為已經被公眾知道的內容。）
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- 適格的先前技術（102(a)(2)）：在專利申請案有效申請日前提出申請的美國專利、美國專利公開案以及國際專利公開案。即便先前技術並未在專利申請案之前公開或公告，但是只要前案「有效申請日」在專利申請案早，仍為適格的先前技術（也就是沒有所謂的擬制新穎性不適用或是不得為進步性引用前案的事情）。
（新穎性優惠期、寬限期）
- 例外不適用先前技術（102(b)(2)(A)）：他人直接或間接從發明人或共同發明人取得發明而取得的專利、申請案或WIPO申請案。
35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(A) limits the use of an inventor’s own work as prior art, when the inventor’s own work is disclosed in a U.S. patent, U.S. patent application publication, or WIPO published application by another who obtained the subject matter directly or indirectly from the inventor or joint inventor.
- 例外不適用先前技術（102(b)(2)(B)）：在發明人、共同發明人，或其他直接或間接自發明人或共同發明人的公開揭露之後的他人的申請案。
35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B) disqualifies subject matter that was effectively filed by another after the subject matter had been publicly disclosed by the inventor, a joint inventor, or another who obtained the subject matter directly or indirectly from the inventor or joint inventor.
- 例外不適用先前技術（102(b)(2)(C)）：在有效申請日前同人或是被授權人擁有的美國專利、申請案或WIPO申請案。
35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) disqualifies subject matter disclosed in a U.S. patent, U.S. patent application publication, or WIPO published application from constituting prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) if the subject matter disclosed and the claimed invention, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, “were owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person.” 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) resembles pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(c) in that both concern common ownership, and both offer an avenue by which an applicant may avoid certain prior art. However, there are significant differences between 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) and pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(c). See MPEP § 2154.02(b).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[MPEP]
MPEP 706.02(a)(1) Determining Whether To Apply 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) or 102(a)(2)I.35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)
First, the examiner should consider whether the reference qualifies as prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1). Next the examiner must determine if any exceptions in 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(1) apply.
Patents claiming or describing the claimed inventions, descriptions of the claimed invention in a printed publication, public use of the claimed invention, placing the claimed invention on sale, and otherwise making the claimed invention available to the public qualify as prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) if the reference predates the effective filing date of the claim. The sale or use of the invention need not occur in the United States to qualify. See MPEP § 2152.
Potential references may be disqualified as prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(1)(A) when the inventor’s own work has been publicly disclosed by the inventor, a joint inventor, or another who obtained the subject matter directly or indirectly from the inventor or joint inventor. 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(1)(A) provides that a disclosure which would otherwise qualify as prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) is not prior art if the disclosure was made: (1) One year or less before the effective filing date of the claimed invention; and (2) by the inventor or a joint inventor, or by another who obtained the subject matter directly or indirectly from the inventor or joint inventor. See MPEP §§ 2153.01(a) and 2153.01(b).
Potential references may also be disqualified as prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(1)(B) if the reference discloses subject matter that was publicly disclosed by the inventor, a joint inventor, or another who obtained the subject matter directly or indirectly from the inventor or joint inventor. Specifically, 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(1)(B) provides that a disclosure which would otherwise qualify as prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) (patent, printed publication, public use, sale, or other means of public availability) may be disqualified as prior art if: (1) The disclosure was made one year or less before the effective filing date of the claimed invention; and (2) the subject matter disclosed had been previously publicly disclosed by the inventor, a joint inventor, or another who obtained the subject matter directly or indirectly from the inventor or joint inventor. See MPEP §§ 2153.02 and 717.01(b)(2).
II.35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2)
First, the examiner should consider whether the reference qualifies as prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2). Next the examiner must determine if any exceptions in 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2) apply.
U.S. patents, U.S. patent applications published under 35 U.S.C. 122(b), and international patent applications published under the Patent Cooperation Treaty to another are prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) if the filing or effective filing date of the disclosure of the reference is before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Even if the issue or publication date of the reference is not before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the reference may still be applicable as prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) if it was “effectively filed” before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with respect to the subject matter relied upon to reject the claim. MPEP § 2152.01 discusses the “effective filing date” of a claimed invention. 35 U.S.C. 102(d) sets forth the criteria to determine when subject matter described in a U.S. patent, U.S. patent application publication, or WIPO published application was “effectively filed” for purposes of 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2). See MPEP § 2154.
資料來源：USPTO
北美智權不錯的內容：http://www.naipo.com/Portals/1/web_tw/Knowledge_Center/Laws/US-64.htm
Ron
沒有留言:
張貼留言