Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 21 FEBRUARY 2017

Examiner Guidelines For Responding To Legal Arguments

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
Contributor
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP is one of the world’s largest firms focusing on...

View firm profile
Explore more from Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP

Patent examiners have applied law to facts for as long as there has been patent examination. Written description, enablement, anticipation, obviousness, and patent-eligibility are just some of the issues that arise during examination and have legal requirements.

United StatesIntellectual Property

Patent examiners have applied law to facts for as long as there has been patent examination. Written description, enablement, anticipation, obviousness, and patent-eligibility are just some of the issues that arise during examination and have legal requirements. Because examiners apply the law, practitioners often find the need to cite the law, in the form of judicial decisions, to establish patentability. Case law is particularly important for issues where statutes or rules do not fully dictate an outcome. A prime example is the issue of obviousness, where the statute is broadly written and judicial decisions have provided the more nuanced guidance that examiners apply. A timely example is patent-eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101, which took on added significance following Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int'l, 134 S. Ct. 2347 (2014). Being a judicial exception to a statute, the "abstract idea" inquiry in particular is largely driven by case law.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from