An Introduction to Patent Novelty: How Unique Does an Invention Need to be? featured image

An Introduction to Patent Novelty: How Unique Does an Invention Need to be?

by John DiGiacomo

Partner

Patent

One of the requirements for patentability is that the invention be “novel.” See 35 U.S.C. §102. Novelty is about whether the invention has already been patented and about what has been disclosed publicly in some manner or way. In simple terms, to meet the novelty requirement, every feature (or equivalent feature) of the invention must already have been disclosed publicly. An equivalent is a feature that has a different form than what is disclosed in the prior art or publications but that serves the same function on the same principle or in the same manner creating the same result. To use a baking analogy, in making cookies, sugar and honey would be equivalents.

If you are an inventor trying to decide if you should file a patent application, one of the first steps in the process is to conduct a novelty search. The invention may be new to you and may even be entirely conceived by you without reference to any prior art, inventions or public information. However, without being known to you, all of the features of your invention might have been disclosed in prior patent applications, trade journals, internet articles, scientific research reports, academic conference presentations and other publications. Thus, a novelty search must be done early in the process. Experienced and proven patent lawyers like those at Revision Legal should be retained to conduct the novelty search.

Another source of public disclosures are the inventors themselves who unwittingly damage their own chances of obtaining a patent. As a hypothetical, an inventor finally completes the New Device and promptly holds a media conference to announce to the world the features and benefits of the New Device. Or, alternatively, the inventor begins “shopping” the New Device around to potential investors without first obtaining signed confidentiality and non-disclosure agreements. These public disclosures can be used by the US Patent Office to reject a patent application on the basis of lack of novelty. Avoiding this pitfall is another reason to retain experienced and proven patent lawyers. However, not all is lost in our hypothetical, since, under US patent law, there is a one-year grace period to file a patent application after a public disclosure by an inventor.

From the above, we can set out the following rules for when a patent application will be rejected on novelty grounds. A patent will be denied if the invention:

  • Has been patented anywhere in the world
  • Was described in any form of publication — including patent applications and verbal publications — more than twelve months before the patent application is filed
  • Was publicly known more than twelve months before the patent application is filed
  • Has been in use for more than twelve months before the patent application is filed
  • Has been sold or offered for sale for more than twelve months before the patent application is filed

Legally, determining novelty is similar to how infringement is analyzed. That is, the “new” invention is broken down into its various elements and claims. Each of these elements/claims is compared to the prior art and what is publicly known. If every element/claim has been publicly disclosed in some manner, then the patent will be denied on novelty grounds. Conversely, if at least one element/claim has NOT been disclosed in the prior art or in some other manner, then the invention will satisfy the novelty requirement of patentability.

For more information or if you have an invention that you want to patent, contact the patent lawyers at Revision Legal at 231-714-0100.

Extra, Extra!
Recent Posts

2025 Changes to Trademark Fees

2025 Changes to Trademark Fees

Trademark

There are some significant changes coming to the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) that will affect trademark filings beginning January 18, 2025. These changes include the introduction of the Trademark Center, new fees, and revised application requirements. Here is an overview of the key changes: The USPTO will retire the TEAS system, which […]

Read more about 2025 Changes to Trademark Fees

Automated Decision-Making Technology: California Releases Proposed Regulations

Automated Decision-Making Technology: California Releases Proposed Regulations

Internet Law

In today’s competitive e-commerce landscape, automated decision-making technology is becoming more and more important. From personalized product recommendations to targeted advertising and streamlined logistics, these systems help ecommerce businesses adapt and grow. But new regulations are on the horizon, and these changes could reshape the way e-commerce businesses use automation. The California Privacy Protection Agency […]

Read more about Automated Decision-Making Technology: California Releases Proposed Regulations

FTC Adopts Final “Click to Cancel Rule”

FTC Adopts Final “Click to Cancel Rule”

Internet Law

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has issued final amendments to its trade regulation rule concerning negative option plans, also known as the “click to cancel rule.” This rule aims to address widespread deceptive practices that prohibit customers from cancelling services in the same manner in which they signed up. Here’s a detailed summary of the […]

Read more about FTC Adopts Final “Click to Cancel Rule”

Put Revision Legal on your side