Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Patent Law Blogs -> Patently Obvious
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Patent Law
: Patently ObviousQuestion on dedication of material
By Dennis Crouch, Esq.
I'm working on compiling the data from the recent survey on antedating prior art through the use of Rule 131 affidavits during patent prosecution. I have a question for practitioners on the current state of the dedication rule.
MPEP 715 reads as follows:
An affidavit or declaration under 37 CFR 1.131 is not appropriate . . . (F) Where the reference is the disclosure of a prior U.S. patent to the same party, not copending. The question is one of dedication to the public. Note however, In re Gibbs, 437 F.2d 486, 168 USPQ 578 (CCPA 1971) which substantially did away with the doctrine of dedication.
Full post as published by Patently Obvious on July 27, 2009 (boomark / email).

Google Search Data to Help Define Obscenity
"Indeglia, R.I. high court nominee, is known for dedication, 'quiet strength'"
Planning Boards Imposition of Fee in Lieu of Parkland Dedication for Cluster Subdivision Upheld
AIG's Auditors Find Material Weaknesses in Valuing Complex Instruments
What Does Competency Look Like
US Patent 7452659 - Molecular layer nanogap patterning







