1996 UnderstandingPatenteseAPatentGl

From GM-RKB
(Redirected from Silverman & Stacey, 1996)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Subject Headings: Patent; Patent Filing; Patent Filing Process; Patenting Glossary; Active Inducement to Infringe; Apparatus Claim; Application; Apportionment of Profit; Attorneys' Fees Award; Best Mode; Certificate of Correction; Patent Claim; Combining Prior Art; Comprising; Invention Conception; Constructive Reduction to Practice; Continuation Application; Continuation-in-Part Application; Contributory Infringement; Copying; Critical Date; Crowded Art; Dedication to the Public; Dependent Patent Claim; Design Patent; Disclosure; Divisional Application; Doctrine of Claim Differentiation; Doctrine of Equivalents; Double Patenting; [[Equivalents—Means-Plus-Function Claims]]; Reverse Doctrine of Equivalents; Patent Examiner; Exceptional Case; Experimental Use; Failure of Others; File Wrapper Estoppel; File Wrapper; Fraud on the Patent and Trademark Office; GATT; Gist of the Invention; How to Make; How to Use; Hypothetical Person Skilled in the Art; Improvement Patent; Indefiniteness of Patent Claim; Independent Patent Claim; Patent Infringement; Patent Interference; Invention; Inventive Entity; Inventor; Jepson Claim; Literal Infringement; Long-Felt Need; Lost Profits; Maintenance Fee; New Matter; Notice (Also Marking); Notice of Allowance; Notice of Appeal; Novelty; Obvious to Try; Obviousness; Office Action; On Sale; Ordinary Skill in the Art; Patent; Patentee; Patent Preamble; Preferred Embodiment; Prejudgment Interest; Presumption of Validity; Prior Art; Prior-Art Statement; Profit; Prosecution History Estoppel; Prosecution; Provisional Patent Application; Public Use; Reduction to Practice; Patent Reissue; Patent Rejection; Request for Reexamination; Restriction Requirement; Royalty (Reasonable Royalty); Secondary Considerations; Skill in the Art; Specification; Teach Toward & Teach Away; Teach; Terminal Disclaimer; That Which Infringes; That Which Anticipates; Willful Patent Infringement;

Notes

Cited By

Quotes

Abstract

All too frequently, intellectual property attorneys use patent jargon and, as a result, others are unable to understand. To reduce potential confusion, the following glossary provides general definitions of a number of frequently used patent terms with a view toward aiding in the comprehension of such terms. As space limitations preclude full delineation of all meanings, the definitions that follow should be regarded as providing accurate, but not exhaustive, meanings of the terms. Italicized words represent terms that are defined elsewhere in the glossary.

References

;

 AuthorvolumeDate ValuetitletypejournaltitleUrldoinoteyear
1996 UnderstandingPatenteseAPatentGlArnold B Silverman
George K Stacey
Understanding “Patenteseâ - A Patent Glossary1996