Printed Publication Bars (JWB)

• In re Baxter
  • Referenced a technical report
  • only only infer invention from report, arguably not described in it.
  • Ruling: Inference is sufficient – someone with ordinary skill in the art is enabled
• In re Klopfenstein
  • 14-slide presentation displayed at a conference
  • shown twice but not archived
  • IS a printed publication because there was no ban on taking notes/copying slides
  • the public at the presentation were people skilled in the art, therefore a public presentation
• Pickering v. Holman
  • Patentee published experimented results (testing)
  • ‘Published’ has no experimental exception
• Mehl/biophile Intl Corp. v. Milgraum
  • Two sources: Instruction manual (other related application), and Article on tissue damage to guinea pigs
  • Laser to remove hair
  • Instruction manual not a printed publication, but article was
  • Manual missing an element of invention, not enabling
  • Article was not explicit but is the only way to do it
• Jockmus v. Leviton
  • Product catalog
  • German product, written in French, US patent
  • Light that looks like a candle
  • Distributed to people interested in art (targeted audience)
• SRI International v. Internet Security Systems
  • SRI had patent for way to detect intrusion on a network
  • created two reports before critical date and patent referenced both
  • One of the reports was discussed at a conference, which invalidated patent
  • Second of reports was put on a server, which could only be accessed if someone pointed you to it, did not invalid patent