<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Biotechnology Patent Law Blog &#124; Patents4Life by Warren Woessner &#187; Prior Art</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.patents4life.com/category/prior-art/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.patents4life.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 Jan 2012 14:44:13 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.4</generator>
	<atom:link rel='hub' href='http://www.patents4life.com/?pushpress=hub'/>
		<item>
		<title>Fed. Cir. Holds Provisionals Are U.S. Filings For 102(E)</title>
		<link>http://www.patents4life.com/2010/07/fed-cir-holds-provisionals-are-u-s-filings-for-102e/</link>
		<comments>http://www.patents4life.com/2010/07/fed-cir-holds-provisionals-are-u-s-filings-for-102e/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jul 2010 16:21:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Warren Woessner</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Prior Art]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal Circuit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Giacomini]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hillmer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intellectual property]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ip]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Warren Woessner]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.patents4life.com/?p=421</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In case you wondered if this was a settled question in the ever-shifting world of section 102, yesterday, In re Giacomini, (Rader, C.J.), (copy at end of post) the panel held that the effective U.S. filing date of a U.S. patent asserted to be prior art against a &#8220;later-filed patent&#8221; was the filing date of the [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.patents4life.com/2010/07/fed-cir-holds-provisionals-are-u-s-filings-for-102e/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Does a Slideshow Show Too Much? In re Klopfenstein Revisited</title>
		<link>http://www.patents4life.com/2009/09/does-a-slideshow-show-too-much-in-re-klopfenstein-revisited/</link>
		<comments>http://www.patents4life.com/2009/09/does-a-slideshow-show-too-much-in-re-klopfenstein-revisited/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Sep 2009 22:30:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Warren Woessner</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Prior Art]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal Circuit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Klopfenstein]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lister]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[novelty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Warren Woessner]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.patents4life.com/2009/09/does-a-slideshow-show-too-much-in-re-klopfenstein-revisited/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In re Lister, the Federal Circuit repeatedly cited In re Klopfenstein, 380 F.3d 1345 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (link below), a decision that held that a poster presentation that was available for viewing at a meeting for 2-3 days was a &#8220;printed publication&#8221; under 102(b). This decision has lots of interesting dicta that indicates, for example, [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.patents4life.com/2009/09/does-a-slideshow-show-too-much-in-re-klopfenstein-revisited/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Fed. Cir. Tees Off On Board&#039;s Evidence of Timing of Publication</title>
		<link>http://www.patents4life.com/2009/09/fed-cir-tees-off-on-boards-evidence-of-timing-of-publication/</link>
		<comments>http://www.patents4life.com/2009/09/fed-cir-tees-off-on-boards-evidence-of-timing-of-publication/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Sep 2009 14:35:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Warren Woessner</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Prior Art]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EPC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal Circuit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[golf]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lister]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Warren Woessner]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.patents4life.com/2009/09/fed-cir-tees-off-on-boards-evidence-of-timing-of-publication/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ln re Lister, appeal no. 2009-1060 (Fed. Cir, Sept. 22, 2009) (link at bottom) the panel found that a manuscript by the inventor, &#8220;Advanced Handicap Alternatives for Golf&#8221; which he had sent into the Copyright Office some time prior to filing a patent application on his &#8220;method for playing an organized game of golf,&#8221; was [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.patents4life.com/2009/09/fed-cir-tees-off-on-boards-evidence-of-timing-of-publication/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Federal Circuit Split Decision</title>
		<link>http://www.patents4life.com/2009/03/26federal-circuit-split-decision/</link>
		<comments>http://www.patents4life.com/2009/03/26federal-circuit-split-decision/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Mar 2009 15:39:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Warren Woessner</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Obviousness]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patenting Methods/Processes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Prior Art]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal Circuit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Warren Woessner]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.patents4life.com/2009/03/26/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Federal Circuit Split Decision on &#8216;Public Accessibility&#8217; of Internet Posting, Patent Strategy &#38; Management, April, 2008 Federal%20Circuit%20Split%20Decision.pdf]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.patents4life.com/2009/03/26federal-circuit-split-decision/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Federal Circuit Applies Bilski Standard</title>
		<link>http://www.patents4life.com/2009/03/federal-circuit-applies-bilski-standard/</link>
		<comments>http://www.patents4life.com/2009/03/federal-circuit-applies-bilski-standard/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Mar 2009 15:37:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Warren Woessner</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Obviousness]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patenting Methods/Processes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Prior Art]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal Circuit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Warren Woessner]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.patents4life.com/2009/03/25/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Federal Circuit Applies Bilski Standard in Classen, Patent Strategy &#38; Management, March, 2009 Federal%20Circuit%20Applies%20Bilski%20Standard%20in%20Classen.pdf]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.patents4life.com/2009/03/federal-circuit-applies-bilski-standard/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Ex Parte Kubin</title>
		<link>http://www.patents4life.com/2009/03/ex-parte-kubin/</link>
		<comments>http://www.patents4life.com/2009/03/ex-parte-kubin/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Mar 2009 15:36:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Warren Woessner</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Obviousness]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patentable Subject Matter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Prior Art]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Warren Woessner]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.patents4life.com/2009/03/24/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ex Parte Kubin: Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences Applies Obvious to Try&#8217; in Post-KSR Biotechnology Appeal, Patent Strategy &#38; Management, January, 2009 Ex%20Parte%20Kubin.pdf]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.patents4life.com/2009/03/ex-parte-kubin/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

