Main Page

Intellectual Property for Engineers

INTRODUCTION

Main Chapter: Introduction

• The main purpose for obtaining a patent is economic.
• It grants the exclusive right to make, use or sell the invention for a limited period of time.
• The governing law is Title 35 of the United States Code.
• The governing regulations are from Title 37 of the Code of Federal Regulations.
• The law is federal, so patent cases are resolved in the federal court system:
  • district courts;
  • circuit courts;
  • the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC), a special court for patent cases; and,
  • the Supreme Court.
• The US Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) processes patent applications.
• Patents last for 20 years from the date the application is filed with the PTO.
• Patents have the attributes of personal property.
• The foundation of the federal government's authority to create a patent system is in the constitution. The purposes is explicitly economic, "to promote the progress of science and useful arts..."
• Other forms of intellectual property
  • copyright;
  • trademarks; and,
  • trade secrets.

The Federal Court System

The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Established on October 1, 1982. The holdings of the the CCPA and the U.S. Court of Claims are binding precedent in the Federal Circuit, South Corp. v. US (South Corp. v. US (full text)).

Legal, Policy and Constitutional Foundation

BONITO BOATS, INC. v. THUNDER CRAFT BOATS, INC., 489 U.S. 141 (1989): full text

BONITO BOATS, INC. v. THUNDER CRAFT BOATS, INC., 489 U.S. 141 (1989)

NOVELTY

Cases

In re Hall (full text)

In re Hall

Philips Electric Co. v. Thermal Industries, Inc. (full text)

Philips Electric Co. v. Thermal Industries, Inc.

Universal Athletic Sales Co. v. American Gym Recreational & Athletic Equipment Corporation, Inc. (full text)

Universal Athletic Sales Co. v. American Gym Recreational & Athletic Equipment Corporation, Inc.

NONOBVIOUSNESS

The main historical cases:

• 1850: Hotchkiss v. Greenwood (Hotchkiss v. Greenwood (full text)) Established the "nonobviousness" language the subsequently became codified.
• 1966: GRAHAM V. JOHN DEERE CO (GRAHAM V. JOHN DEERE CO (full text)) The fundamental inquiries are
  • scope and content of the prior art;
  • differences between the prior art and the claims at issue;
  • level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art; and,
  • secondary considerations, including:
    • commercial success of the invention;
    • long-felt but unsolved needs;
    • failure of others to find a solution, etc.
• 1966: US V. Adams (US v. Adams (full text)) All the evidence must be considered. Even small changes can have large consequences, which is relevant to a determination of nonobviousness.

Ordinary Skill in the Art

Reiner v. I. Leon Co. (full text)

Reiner v. I. Leon Co.

South Corp. v. US (full text)

South Corp. v. US

INVENTOR ELIGIBILITY

GOTTSCHALK v. BENSON, 409 U.S. 63 (1972): full text

GOTTSCHALK v. BENSON, 409 U.S. 63 (1972)

Diamond v. Diehr, 450 U.S. 175 (1981): (full text)

Diamond v. Diehr, 450 U.S. 175 (1981)

Laboratory Corporation of America vs. Metabolite Laboratories, 548 U.S. 124 (2005): (full text)

Laboratory Corporation of America vs. Metabolite Laboratories, 548 U.S. 124 (2005)

METABOLITE LABORATORIES, INC. and Competitive Technologies, Inc. v. LABORATORY CORPORATION OF AMERICA HOLDINGS (doing business as LabCorp): the CAFC case (full text)

ANTICIPATION

Bendix Corp. v. Balax, Inc. (full text)

Bendix Corp. v. Balax, Inc.

Chester v. Miller (full text)

Chester v. Miller

PRIOR ART

Pfaff v. Wells Electronics: full text

Justice clipart, copyright FCIT.