Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 06 DECEMBER 2013

PTAB Applies Stringent Standards For Conception And Reduction-To-Practice Standards

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

In Garmin v. Cuozzo, the first IPR final decision, the PTAB rejected the patent owner’s corroborating documents, declaration, and deposition testimony introduced to prove that he was first to invent the claimed speed limit indicator technology.

United StatesIntellectual Property

In Garmin v. Cuozzo, the first IPR final decision, the PTAB rejected the patent owner's corroborating documents, declaration, and deposition testimony introduced to prove that he was first to invent the claimed speed limit indicator technology.

Under pre-AIA law, inventors can disqualify prior art references by proving an earlier date of invention. To antedate a reference, an inventor must demonstrate 1) a moment of " conception" and 2) reasonable diligence towards reducing the invention to practice. In disapproving Cuozzo's attempt to antedate two prior art patents, the Board applied a strict "independent corroboration" standard, pointing to insufficiently explained gaps in the inventor's patenting efforts as demonstrating no "continuous exercise of reasonable diligence."

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