In a recent decision, the Federal Circuit continues to expand the definition of a printed publication with regard to patentable matter.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 print issues and online access
$209.00 per year
only $17.42 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
References
I.C.E. Corp. v. Armco Steel Corp., 250 F. Supp. 738, 743, 148 USPQ 537, 540 (SDNY 1966).
In re Wyer, 655 F.2d at 226, 210 USPQ at 794.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology v. AB Fortia, 774 F.2d 1104, 1109, 227 USPQ 428, 432 (Fed. Cir. 1985).
In re Carl F. Klopfenstein and John L. Brent, Jr., 03- 1583 (regarding Serial No. 09/699,950), decided August 18, 2004).
In re Hall, 781 F.2d 897 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Howmedica, 530 F. Supp. at 860.
Jockmus v. Leviton, 28 F.2d 812, 813-14 (2d Cir. 1928).
AT&T Corp. v. Microsoft Corp., 2004 US Dist. (SDNY, Feb. 18, 2004).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Teitelbaum, R., Cohen, M. Publish and perish: what constitutes a bar under the patent laws. Nat Biotechnol 22, 1449–1450 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt1104-1449
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt1104-1449
