Ex Parte TRICK - Page 19



          Appeal No. 2001-1306                                      Page 19           
          Application No. 08/100,019                                                  

               (a) When any claim of an application or a patent under                 
               reexamination is rejected on reference to a domestic patent            
               which substantially shows or describes but does not claim              
               the same patentable invention, as defined in § 1.601(n), as            
               the rejected invention, or on reference to a foreign patent            
               or to a printed publication, and the inventor of the subject           
               matter of the rejected claim, the owner of the patent under            
               reexamination, or the person qualified under §§ 1.42, 1.43             
               or 1.47, shall make oath or declaration as to facts showing            
               a completion of the invention in this country before the               
               filing date of the application on which the domestic patent            
               issued, or before the date of the foreign patent, or before            
               the date of the printed publication, then the patent or                
               publication cited shall not bar the grant of a patent to the           
               inventor or the confirmation of the patentability of the               
               claims of the patent, unless the date of such patent or                
               printed publication is more than one year prior to the date            
               on which the inventor’s or patent owner’s application was              
               filed in this country. [Emphasis added.]                               
               We further observe that 37 CFR § 1.601(n) defines "same                
          patentable invention" as follows:                                           
               (n) Invention "A" is the “same patentable invention” as an             
               invention "B" when invention "A" is the same as (35 U.S.C.             
               § 102) or is obvious (35 U.S.C. 103) in view of invention              
               "B" assuming invention "B" is prior art with respect to                
               invention "A". Invention "A" is a separate patentable                  
               invention with respect to invention "B" when invention "A"             
               is new (35 U.S.C. 102) and non-obvious (35 U.S.C. 103) in              
               view of invention "B" assuming invention "B" is prior art              
               with respect to invention "A".                                         
          Initially, the rules indicate that if the date of the reference             
          to be overcome is more than one year prior to the date on which             
          Appellant’s application was filed (July 30, 1993), the                      
          declaration is ineffective to establish prior invention and                 
          overcome the rejection.  Secondly, determination of the “same               





Page:  Previous  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007