Appeal No. 96-3022
Application 08/278,012
profiting financially from using the invention at least as early
as October, 1989, which is over four years before the filing date
of this application” (final rejection, Paper No. 9, pages 4 and
5). The examiner contends that “Applicant is not permitted to
commercially exploit his invention for more than the one-year
time period of 35 U.S.C. 102(b) and thus should not be permitted
to receive a patent for the invention” (answer, Paper No. 31,
page 6).
The appellant, on the other hand, submits that the activity
described in the disclosure document and in the 37 CFR § 1.132
declarations does not constitute a public use or on sale bar
within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) because it was conducted
primarily for experimental purposes (see pages 4 through 7 in the
brief, Paper No. 30). The appellant does not dispute that the
device described in the disclosure document and in the 37 CFR
§ 1.132 declarations fully anticipates the claimed spinning tool
assembly or would have rendered such assembly obvious by its
addition to the prior art.
Issues arising under the “public use” and “on sale” bar
provisions of 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) must be analyzed in light of the
-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007