EB: Vas-Cath Inc. v. Mahurkar (1991)

From Bill Goodwine's Wiki
Revision as of 11:01, 11 April 2011 by Ebingle (talk | contribs) (Created page with "==The Situation== *Mahurkar invents new catheter that created less puncture area than those of the prior art. *Vas-Cath sued Mahurkar claiming his patent is invalid as anticipat...")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigationJump to search

The Situation

  • Mahurkar invents new catheter that created less puncture area than those of the prior art.
  • Vas-Cath sued Mahurkar claiming his patent is invalid as anticipated under 102 - Mahurkar had (more than one year prior) filed a Canadian patent describing the invention
  • Time line:
    • US Design Application (1981)
    • Canadian Application (1982) - problem (because 1 year prior to US utility filing)
    • US Utility Application (19984)
  • Mahurkar wants the design application filing date to represent his date of invention, but in order for that to happen he must have had adequate "written description" of the patent. Section 112 requires full disclosure - do drawings count?