1 / 12

Analogous Arts

Analogous Arts. Patent Law 3.29.04. Hetherington “Bladder Bags”.

vpagan
Download Presentation

Analogous Arts

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Analogous Arts Patent Law 3.29.04

  2. Hetherington “Bladder Bags”

  3. United States Patent 4,683,949 Sydansk ,   et al.August 4, 1987 Conformance improvement in a subterranean hydrocarbon-bearing formation using a polymer gel Conformance improvement is achieved in a subterranean hydrocarbon-bearing formation using a gel. The gel components are combined at the surface and injected into the desired treatment zone via a wellbore Inventors: Sydansk; Robert D. (Littleton, CO); Argabright; Perry A. (Larkspur, CO) Assignee: Marathon Oil Company (Findlay, OH)

  4. Analogous arts: tests • From same field? • Pertinent to problem solved? • P. 800

  5. Sydansk reference • Board of Appeals: same field (oil extraction) • Federal Circuit: wrong! • Storage vs extraction • P. 801

  6. Sydansk: Same Problem? • Differences in conditions governing problem to be solved • Underground conditions different from storage tanks • P 802; PHOSITA faced with Clay’s problem would not look in oil extraction art – AGREE?

  7. Counterpoint: In re Paulsen • Pp. 804-805: Hinge in laptop computer claim • Other mechanical arts relevant; “problem not unique to portable computers . . .” • Importance of problem focus

  8. “General Principles” • In re Mariani, 177 F.2d 293Cust. & Pat.App. 1949 • Application was properly rejected with respect to certain claims for patent for fruit juice extractor, where features claimed to be novel were not in fact novel, but were scientific necessities, or, at least, scientifically desirable and well known to those skilled in the art, and had been used in a fishing reel and in automobile jacks.

More Related