我会加入讨论主要是了板上其他板友,而不是你。
1. 先前主题：公开下位发明的上位技术资讯,申请范围为下位发明内容
2. 102.a.1对应到的是102.b.1,
102.a.1意指"claimed invention"的新颖性要件,即判为先前技术的情况
102.b.1-a意指由inventor,joint inventor或another由发明人处取得"申请专利
之发明"所提供的揭露资讯(DISCLOSURES)可以排除,
即"哪些人(who)"所提供的揭露资讯(disclosure)可以排除
何况条文中的disclosure有说是any disclosure吗?
法条上是 "A disclosure" not Any disclosure
102.b.1-b意指该揭露内容(the subject matter)由102.b.1-a明列的对象(那些人)所
提供的揭露资讯不落入先前技术的范围
(identical subject matter approach)
3. 就一般claim的写法,通常会把发明的上位概念写入claim,
这种情况就会符合identical subject matter (claimed invention)
讨论的情况是: 发明为A1, 公开A(未写入claim)这种情况,
你这次说明和当初讨论的主要内容不同
※ 引述《deathcustom (about to be couple)》之铭言：
: ※ 引述《VanDeLord (HelloWorld)》之铭言：
: : US 102(b)(1) & (b)(2)
: : Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 31 /
: : Thursday, February 14, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
: : comment#30 p11065~p11066
: : http://www.uspto.gov/aia_implementation/FITF_Final_Guidelines_FR_2-14-2013.pdf
: : Comment30:
: : A number of comments, including comments from a number of universities and
: : university groups, opposed the Office's interpretation of the subparagraph
: : (B) provision of AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(1) or 102(b)(2)
: : (the subparagraph (B) provision), requiring that the subject matter
: : previously publicly disclosed by the inventor be identical to the subject
: : matter of the disclosure to be disqualified under the subparagraph (B)
: : provision (identical subject matter approach).
: : The comments opposing the Office's
: : interpretation of the subparagraph (B) provision stated that:
: : ...blablabla...etc.
: 这里讨论的是35 U.S.C 102 (b) (1)(B)/(2)(B)
: 但是你忽略了(A)???
: 当我们这一串讨论串再讨论优惠期对于进步性的适用时，我觉得应该一并考虑(A)
: 102 (b)(1)(A)整个读起来是
: A disclosure made 1 year or less before the effective filing date of a claimed
: invention shall not be prior art to the claimed invention under subsection
: (a)(1) if the disclosure was made by the inventor or joint inventor or by
: another who obtained the subject matter disclosed directly or indirectly from
: the inventor or a joint inventor
: 在所请求发明的有效申请日以前的一年以内的揭露(对应于(a)(1)定义者)不应该做为先前
: 技术，如果所述揭露系由发明人、共同发明人或由前述两者处直接或间接得知所请发明主
: 体的第三人所做的
: 发明人在年初的ISSCC研讨会中揭露甲一
: 并且在年中申请相关的专利，独立项请求甲(甲一与甲二的上位概念)，附属项请求了
: 甲一与甲二
: 则在年初的研讨会揭露"依据102(b)(1)(A)"会被排除做为"先前技术的适格性"
: 当然如果有人在研讨会后马上去请了一个甲二的专利、或是去揭露一个甲二的变形
: 如果依据102(b)(1)(B)/(2)(B)
: 则"除非甲二这个概念是发明人提出来的，并且发明人同时提出甲是上位概念"，否则甲二
: 这个概念对于发明人想请的甲(独立项)就是先前技术，并且因为甲二也会一并使甲一GG
: : Response:
: : As discussed previously, the starting point for construction of a statute is
: : the language of the statute itself.
: : Subparagraph (B) of each of AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(1) and 102(b)(2) provides
: : that certain disclosures shall not be prior art if ''the subject matter
: : disclosed had, before such disclosure [or before such subject matter was
: : effectively filed under 102(a)(2)], been publicly disclosed by the inventor
: : or a joint inventor or another who obtained the subject matter disclosed
: : directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor.''
: : ...(略)
: : The single instance of the phrase ''the subject matter'' in subparagraph (B)
: : of each of AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(1) and 102(b)(2) cannot reasonably be read as
: : concurrently describing two discrete subject matters. Therefore, the single
: : instance of the phrase ''the subject matter'' in subparagraph (B) of each of
: : AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(1) and 102(b)(2) cannot reasonably be interpreted as
: : including variations within its ambit.
: : AIA 35 U.S.C. 100 defines inventor and joint inventor or coinventor with
: : respect to the individual or individuals ''who invented or discovered the
: : subject matter of the invention, '' and defines "claimed invention'' as ''the
: : subject matter defined by a claim in a patent or an application for a patent.''
: : USPTO 这部分的guildline已经出了,很详细,应该很好找。
: :