在AIA之後，「可以用發明人自己在前的揭露資料排除"中間"的引證案」。
(所述"中間"指有效申請日之前、在前揭露之後；所述「在前的揭露」包括美國國內外優先權案、母案、一般揭露等)
MPEP 706.02(b)(1)揭示克服根據「35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) 或 102(a)(2)」的核駁意見的方式（我的筆記）：
(A)
專利申請案可以通過「主張比申請在前的先前技術更早的母案申請日優先權（35 U.S.C. 120，CA, CIP, DIV）」來排除此先前技術的阻礙。此節所述「專利申請案」並未在申請時主張在前申請日申請案的優先權（期限規定在 37 CFR 1.78），因此需要(1)聲明需要先前申請案才能滿足專利可實施性；或(2)提出非蓄意延遲主張先前申請案優勢的請願。
(B)
專利申請案可以主張比先前技術更早的臨時申請案（provisional application）的優先權日來排除先前技術的阻礙，同樣需要(1)聲明需要先前申請案才能滿足專利可實施性；或(2)提出非蓄意延遲主張先前申請案優勢的請願。
(C)
專利申請案可以通過主張比先前技術更早的「國外專利申請案優先權（需要翻譯為英文）」來排除先前技術的阻礙，仍需要(1)聲明需要先前申請案才能滿足專利可實施性；或(2)提出非蓄意延遲主張先前申請案優勢的請願。
(D)
根據AIA的35 U.S.C. 102(b)的新穎性排除條款，專利申請案可以藉由提出「比先前技術更早的由"相同發明人、共同發明人或直接或間接從發明人得到的"參考文獻或揭露內容」的宣誓或聲明來排除先前技術的阻礙，而此在前的揭露內容仍應公開在專利申請日有效申請日前一年內，否則仍會失去102(b)提供的新穎性優惠期。
(E)
通過建立「共同擁有、共同研發合約」來克服專利申請案前先前技術的阻礙。
有關102(b)(2)(c)可參考先前部落格文章：有關102(a)(2)例外條款102(b)(2)的筆記 - MPEP 2154.02（http://enpan.blogspot.tw/2017/05/102a2102b2-mpep-215402.html）
[參考法條]
706.02(b)(1) Overcoming a 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) or 102(a)(2) Rejection Based on a Printed Publication or Patent
In addition to persuasively arguing that the claims are patentably distinguishable over the prior art or amending the claims to overcome the prior art rejection, a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) or 102(a)(2) can be overcome by:
- (A) Submitting a benefit claim under 35 U.S.C. 120 within the time period set in 37 CFR 1.78 by providing the required reference to a prior application in a corrected application data sheet under 37 CFR 1.76 and by establishing that the prior application satisfies the enablement and written description requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(a), or filing a grantable petition to accept an unintentionally delayed benefit claim under 37 CFR 1.78. See MPEP §§ 211et seq. and 706.02; or
- (B) Submitting a benefit claim under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) within the time period set in 37 CFR 1.78 by providing the required reference to a prior provisional application in a corrected application data sheet under 37 CFR 1.76 and by establishing that the prior application satisfies the enablement and written description requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or filing a grantable petition to accept an unintentionally delayed benefit claim under 37 CFR 1.78. See MPEP §§ 211et seq. and 706.02; or
- (C) Submitting a claim to priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a) - (d) within the time period set in 37 CFR 1.55 by identifying a prior foreign application in a corrected application data sheet under 37 CFR 1.76 and by establishing that the prior foreign application satisfies the enablement and written description requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or filing a grantable petition to accept a delayed priority claim under 37 CFR 1.55. See MPEP §§ 213 - 216. The foreign priority filing date must antedate the reference and be perfected. The filing date of the priority document is not perfected unless applicant has filed a certified priority document in the application (and an English language translation, if the document is not in English) (see 37 CFR 1.55(g)); or
- (D) Filing an affidavit or declaration under 37 CFR 1.130 to establish that an applied reference or disclosure that was not made more than one year before the effective filing date of the claimed invention is not prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) due to an exception listed in 35 U.S.C. 102(b). Under 37 CFR 1.130(a), an affidavit or declaration of attribution may be submitted to disqualify a disclosure as prior art because it was made by the inventor or a joint inventor, or the subject matter disclosed was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor. Under 37 CFR 1.130(b), an affidavit or declaration of prior public disclosure may be submitted to disqualify an intervening disclosure as prior art if the subject matter disclosed had been publicly disclosed by the inventor or a joint inventor or another who obtained the subject matter disclosed directly or indirectly from the inventor or joint inventor (1) before the date the intervening disclosure was made on which the rejection is based, or (2) before the date the subject matter in the U.S. patent, U.S. patent application publication, or WIPO published application on which the rejection is based was effectively filed. See MPEP §§ 717 and 2155; or
- (E) Establishing common ownership or establishing evidence of a Joint Research Agreement to overcome a 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) rejection or a 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection based on prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) by establishing entitlement to the 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) exception. See MPEP §§ 717.02 and 2154.02(c).
-------------------------------------------------
37 CFR 1.130: AFFIDAVIT OR DECLARATION OF ATTRIBUTION OR PRIOR PUBLIC DISCLOSURE UNDER THE LEAHY-SMITH AMERICA INVENTS ACT
...
(b) Affidavit or declaration of prior public disclosure. When any claim of an application or a patent under reexamination is rejected, the applicant or patent owner may submit an appropriate affidavit or declaration to disqualify a disclosure as prior art by establishing that the subject matter disclosed had, before such disclosure was made or before such subject matter was effectively filed, been publicly disclosed by the inventor or a joint inventor or another who obtained the subject matter disclosed directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor. An affidavit or declaration under this paragraph must identify the subject matter publicly disclosed and provide the date such subject matter was publicly disclosed by the inventor or a joint inventor or another who obtained the subject matter disclosed directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor.
...
參考資料：USPTO, BITLAW
Ron
沒有留言:
張貼留言