Invalidating patent claims internet dating euphemisms

The statute also requires that the specification conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his or her invention.

Failure to do so can result in patent claims being held invalid.

It further requires that the disclosure reveal the "best mode" contemplated by the inventor of carrying out the invention.

Such prior art may, for example, take the form of prior patents or publications. If the prior-art patent was issued within one year prior to the application filing date which eventually became the patent being evaluated, the effective prior-art date of the patent is the filing date of the application which became the prior-art patent.Another approach to invalidating a patent is to prove that the invention was in public use or on sale in the U. more than a year prior to the date of the application.If one can prove that the invention was known or used by others in the U. or patented or described in a publication in any country before the invention thereof by the applicant, the patent is invalid.If one concludes that a patent is valid and would be infringed by a particular practice, the obvious alternatives would be to pursue an approach which does not infringe the patent or to consider making inquiry of the patent owner to determine whether a patent license would be available. While the foregoing does not purport to provide an exhaustive listing of the various ways in which patent validity may be evaluated, it is hoped that it will provide an enhanced understanding of some of the major considerations generally involved in such evaluations. Silverman is a partner in the law firm Eckert Seamans Cherin & Mellott, 600 Grant Street, 42nd Floor, Pittsburgh, PA 15219; telephone (412) 566-6000; fax (412) 566-6099; e-mail [email protected]

Leave a Reply