n a relatively short, unanimous decision authored by Justice Thomas, the Court begins by explaining that twenty-years ago in Pfaff v. Wells Electronics, Inc., 525 U.S. 55, 67 (1998) the Court determined that an invention was on sale within the meaning of pre-AIA § 102 if it was subject to a commercial offer for sale and it was ready for patenting. Moreover, Thomas recognized that prior to passage of the AIA the Federal Circuit had clearly established that a secret sale could invalidate a patent. Therefore, given the settled precedent, Justice Thomas explained that there was a presumption “that when Congress reenacted the same language in the AIA, it adopted the earlier judicial construction of that phrase.” The Court also found the catch all phrase “or otherwise available to the public” was “simply not enough of a change… to conclude that Congress intended to alter the meaning of the reenacted term ‘on sale.’”
The post Supreme Court decides Helsinn v. Teva, Secret Sale Qualifies as Prior Art Under the AIA appeared first on IPWatchdog.com | Patents & Patent Law.
Supreme Court decides Helsinn v. Teva, Secret Sale Qualifies as Prior Art Under the AIA
No Comments
Patent
- Enablement
- Fee Shifting
- Litigation
- US Inventor Backs SCOTUS Petition to Clarify Claim Construction Principles
- Iancu Says Goodbye, Urges Commitment to ‘American Innovation Renaissance’
- Biden’s Opportunity to Protect American Innovation
- Washington Insiders Say Farewell to 2020 and Look Ahead to 2021
- Innovation Alliance Urges Biden Administration to Support Patent Rights
Recent Posts
- US Inventor Backs SCOTUS Petition to Clarify Claim Construction Principles
- Iancu Says Goodbye, Urges Commitment to ‘American Innovation Renaissance’
- Biden’s Opportunity to Protect American Innovation
- Washington Insiders Say Farewell to 2020 and Look Ahead to 2021
- Innovation Alliance Urges Biden Administration to Support Patent Rights