MPEP Q&A 225: What are the reasons why the prior art element should not be considered an equivalent to the invention disclosed in the specification. - a podcast by Lisa Parmley, USPTO Patent Practitioner #51006
from 2021-06-08T14:12:27
Question: What are the reasons why the prior art element should not be considered an equivalent to the invention disclosed in the specification? Answer: Reasons, why the prior art element should not be considered an equivalent to the invention disclosed in the specification, may include: teachings in the specification that the particular prior art is not equivalent teachings in the prior art reference itself that may tend to show nonequivalence 37 CFR 1.132 affidavit evidence of facts tending to show nonequivalence. Chapter Details: The answer to this question can be found in chapter 2100 of the MPEP. This chapter covers…
The post MPEP Q & A 225: What are the reasons why the prior art element should not be considered an equivalent to the invention disclosed in the specification. appeared first on Patent Education Series.
Further episodes of Patent Bar MPEP Q
Further podcasts by Lisa Parmley, USPTO Patent Practitioner #51006