First to file and first to invent: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 02:36, 4 March 2009

Revision as of 20:35, 6 May 2009

Line 10:

=== Example ===

Assume Tom conceives of a new [[mousetrap]] on January 1, 2006. Tom works diligently from January 1, 2006, to February 1, 2006, to prepare a patent application, and Tom files his patent application on February 1, 2006. Thus, Tom reduced his invention to practice on February 1, 2006. Assume Jerry conceives of the same mousetrap on January 10, 2006, and diligently files a patent application on the new mousetrap on January 20, 2006. Under the first-to-invent system, Tom is entitled to the patent on the mousetrap, because he conceived the mousetrap before Jerry and still worked diligently to reduce it to practice.<ref>[http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/documents/0700_715_07.htm#sect715.07 715.07 Facts and Documentary Evidence [R-3&#93; - 700 Examination of Applications<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref>. TheIf both Tom and Jerry claimed the same invention, the USPTO would institute an interference proceeding between Tom and Jerry to review evidence of conception and diligence.

As a further extension of this example, assume Tweety conceived of the same mousetrap on December 31, 1990. Tweety never told anyone about the mousetrap and did not work on reducing the mousetrap to practice for many years due to financial reasons. Tweety finally reducesreduced the mousetrap to practice on February 15, 2006. Because Tweety did not diligently work to reduce the invention to practice, soin the period before others' conception of the same invention, shehe is not entitled to a patent over Tom or Jerry.<ref>[http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/documents/0700_715_07_a.htm#sect715.07a 715.07(a) Diligence - 700 Examination of Applications<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref> This is one of many reasons why patent attorneys advise clients to file patent applications as soon as possible.

== See also ==