I agree. One of the implications of the point we are making is that subsection 102(a) was drafted in part to do away with precedent under current law that private offers for sale or private uses or secret processes practiced in the United States that result in a product or service that is then made public may be deemed patent-defeating prior art. That will no longer be the case. In effect, the new paragraph 102(a)(1) imposes an overarching requirement for availability to the public, that is a public disclosure, which will limit paragraph 102(a)(1) prior art to subject matter meeting the public accessibility standard that is well-settled in current law, especially case law of the Federal Circuit.
Patrick Leahy: “I agree. One of the implications of the point we are making is that subsection 102(a) was drafted in part to do away…”
On the recordMarch 9, 2011
Editor's note · Context
Leahy discusses changes to patent law regarding public accessibility and prior art.
Share
More from Patrick Leahy
May 25, 2022
Many hoped that President Giammattei would reject the corruption and impunity that his predecessors institutionalized. The reappointment of Attorney General Porras, who according to the State Department has ``repeatedly obstructed and…
May 24, 2022
If we can't clearly and unequivocally condemn the actions of white supremacists, or simply acknowledge the January 6, 2021, attack on our Capitol for what it was, an insurrection, we fan the flames of hatred and violence.





