1. * 102(g) A person shall be entitled to a patent unless ...
(g) {both (1) and (2)}
…. the invention was
made by {another} inventor and
not
abandoned,
suppressed, or
concealed
If the “other” has a patent or patent application and CLAIMS the same thing, an INTERFERENCE is* declared.
If the “other” only DISCLOSES the same thing but there is no “interefering subject matter” in the claims, then the other inventor’s work is available as prior art. It may not be PRIOR, however.
Book goes on about section 104 and in this country: not basic enough for a survey course.
SOURCE: Intro IP - Class 07 =03M = 01/22/07 rjm
Sci. Ev rjm

2. * 102(g) A person shall be entitled to a patent unless ...(g)
(1) during the course of an interference
… another inventor involved therein
establishes, to the extent permitted in section 104,
that before such person's invention thereof
the invention was
made by such other inventor and
not abandoned, suppressed, or
concealed, or
(2) before such person's invention thereof,
the invention was
made in this country by another inventor who
had not abandoned, suppressed, or
concealed it.
In determining priority of invention under this subsection,
there shall be considered
not only the respective dates of
conception and
reduction to practice of the invention,
but also the reasonable diligence of one who was
first to conceive and last to reduce to practice,
from a time prior to conception by the other.
Book goes on about section 104 and in this country: not basic enough for a survey course.
Slides 1-3 referenced C Slides 4-5 referenced C 208 last paragraph.
SOURCE: Intro IP - Class 07 =03M = 01/22/07 rjm
Sci. Ev rjm

3. 102(g) In other words FIRST TO REDUCE ALWAYS WINS unless
SECOND TO REDUCE
was FIRST TO CONCEIVE *and*
was DILIGENT in REDUCING
**NOT from OWN moment of conception** but
from the moment just before
the OTHER PERSON’s conception until OWN reduction
*AND* can prove it with CORROBORATION.
A timeline may help.
SOURCE: Intro IP - Class 07 =03M = 01/22/07 rjm
Sci. Ev rjm

4. diligence period for 1stC, 2nd R
Who wins?
1st to C 2nd to C st to RTP nd to RTP
diligence period for 1stC, 2nd R
1st to REDUCE (Mr. X) wins UNLESS
1st to CONCEIVE (Ms. Y) (who was 2nd to REDUCE) was
DILIGENT in REDUCING from JUST BEFORE
the other’s C and continuing through her own R-T-P
SOURCE: Intro IP - Class 07 =03M = 01/22/07 rjm
Sci. Ev rjm

5. diligence period for 1stC, 2nd R
Who loses? (same thing, said the other way)
2nd to REDUCE (Ms. Y) *loses* unless
2nd to REDUCE can prove she was
1st to CONCEIVE and
DILIGENT
from right before the
2nd to CONCEIVE
(and 1st to REDUCE) (Mr. X)
made his conception, and until she REDUCED
time
1st to C 2nd to C st to RTP nd to RTP
diligence period for 1stC, 2nd R
SOURCE: Intro IP - Class 07 =03M = 01/22/07 rjm
Sci. Ev rjm