MPEP 2125: Difference between revisions

From wikilawschool.net. Wiki Law School does not provide legal advice. For educational purposes only.
m (Reverted edits by 213.61.157.93 (Talk); changed back to last version by WikiSysop)
No edit summary
Line 5: Line 5:
<noinclude>__TOC__</noinclude>
<noinclude>__TOC__</noinclude>


DRAWINGS CAN BE USED AS PRIOR ART
=====DRAWINGS CAN BE USED AS PRIOR ART=====


Drawings and pictures can anticipate claims if they  
Drawings and pictures can anticipate claims if they clearly show the structure which is claimed. However, the picture must show all the claimed structural features and how they are put together. The origin of  
clearly show the structure which is claimed. In re
the drawing is immaterial. For instance, drawings in a design patent can anticipate or make obvious the  
Mraz, 455 F.2d 1069, 173 USPQ 25 (CCPA 1972).
claimed invention as can drawings in utility patents. When the reference is a utility patent, it does not matter  
However, the picture must show all the claimed structural  
that the feature shown is unintended or unexplained in the specification. The drawings must be evaluated for what they reasonably disclose and suggest to one of ordinary skill in the art. See [[MPEP 2121#2121.04 Apparatus and Articles — What Constitutes Enabling Prior Art|MPEP § 2121.04]] for more information on prior art  
features and how they are put together. Jockmus
v. Leviton, 28 F.2d 812 (2d Cir. 1928). The origin of  
the drawing is immaterial. For instance, drawings in a  
design patent can anticipate or make obvious the  
claimed invention as can drawings in utility patents.  
When the reference is a utility patent, it does not matter  
that the feature shown is unintended or unexplained  
in the specification. The drawings must be  
evaluated for what they reasonably disclose and suggest  
to one of ordinary skill in the art. In re Aslanian,
590 F.2d 911, 200 USPQ 500 (CCPA 1979). See
MPEP § 2121.04 for more information on prior art  
drawings as "enabled disclosures."
drawings as "enabled disclosures."


PROPORTIONS OF FEATURES IN A DRAWING  
=====PROPORTIONS OF FEATURES IN A DRAWING ARE NOT EVIDENCE OF ACTUAL PROPORTIONS WHEN DRAWINGS ARE NOT TO SCALE=====
ARE NOT EVIDENCE OF ACTUAL PROPORTIONS  
WHEN DRAWINGS ARE NOT TO  
SCALE


When the reference does not disclose that the drawings  
When the reference does not disclose that the drawings  
are to scale and is silent as to dimensions, arguments  
are to scale and is silent as to dimensions, arguments  
based on measurement of the drawing features  
based on measurement of the drawing features  
are of little value. See Hockerson-Halberstadt, Inc. v.
are of little value.  
Avia Group Int'l, 222 F.3d 951, 956, 55 USPQ2d
 
1487, 1491 (Fed. Cir. 2000) (The disclosure gave no
However, the description of the article pictured can be relied on, in  
indication that the drawings were drawn to scale. "[I]t
is well established that patent drawings do not define
the precise proportions of the elements and may not
be relied on to show particular sizes if the specification
is completely silent on the issue."). However, the  
description of the article pictured can be relied on, in  
combination with the drawings, for what they would  
combination with the drawings, for what they would  
reasonably teach one of ordinary skill in the art. In re
reasonably teach one of ordinary skill in the art.
Wright, 569 F.2d 1124, 193 USPQ 332 (CCPA 1977)
("We disagree with the Solicitor’s conclusion, reached
by a comparison of the relative dimensions of appellant's
and Bauer’s drawing figures, that Bauer 'clearly
points to the use of a chime length of roughly 1/2 to 1
inch for a whiskey barrel.' This ignores the fact that
Bauer does not disclose that his drawings are to scale.
... However, we agree with the Solicitor that
Bauer's
teaching that whiskey losses are influenced
by the distance the liquor needs to 'traverse the pores
of the wood' (albeit in reference to the thickness of
the barrelhead)" would have suggested the desirability
of an increased chime length to one of ordinary skill
in the art bent on further reducing whiskey losses."
569 F.2d at 1127, 193 USPQ at 335-36.)

Revision as of 13:27, October 28, 2011

← MPEP 2124 ↑ MPEP 2100 MPEP 2126 →


2125 Drawings as Prior Art

DRAWINGS CAN BE USED AS PRIOR ART

Drawings and pictures can anticipate claims if they clearly show the structure which is claimed. However, the picture must show all the claimed structural features and how they are put together. The origin of the drawing is immaterial. For instance, drawings in a design patent can anticipate or make obvious the claimed invention as can drawings in utility patents. When the reference is a utility patent, it does not matter that the feature shown is unintended or unexplained in the specification. The drawings must be evaluated for what they reasonably disclose and suggest to one of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP § 2121.04 for more information on prior art drawings as "enabled disclosures."

PROPORTIONS OF FEATURES IN A DRAWING ARE NOT EVIDENCE OF ACTUAL PROPORTIONS WHEN DRAWINGS ARE NOT TO SCALE

When the reference does not disclose that the drawings are to scale and is silent as to dimensions, arguments based on measurement of the drawing features are of little value.

However, the description of the article pictured can be relied on, in combination with the drawings, for what they would reasonably teach one of ordinary skill in the art.

Retrieved from "https://www.wikilawschool.net/w/index.php?title=MPEP_2125&oldid=3991"