Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1558617
 
 

Citations (1)



 
 

Footnotes (47)



 


 



Rethinking Novelty in Patent Law


Sean B. Seymore


Vanderbilt University - Law School

February 24, 2010

Duke Law Journal, Vol. 60, pp. 919-976, 2011

Abstract:     
The novelty requirement seeks to ensure that a patent will not issue if the public already possesses the invention. Although gauging possession is usually straightforward for simple inventions, it can be difficult for those in complex fields like biotechnology, chemistry, and pharmaceuticals. For example, if a drug company seeks to patent a promising molecule that was disclosed but never physically made in the prior art, the key possession question is whether a person having ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA) could have made it at the time of the prior disclosure. Put differently, could the PHOSITA rely on then-existing knowledge in the field to fill in any missing technical details from the prior disclosure? This Article argues that existing novelty jurisprudence mishandles the possession question in two ways. First, it tends to overestimate the PHOSITA’s then-existing knowledge by failing to fully appreciate the complex nature of certain technologies. Second, the current examination framework vitiates the presumption of novelty by placing proof burdens on the would-be inventor that can thwart innovation and frustrate important objectives of the patent system. To resolve these problems and to fill a gap in patent scholarship, this Article proposes a new paradigm that reframes the novelty inquiry during patent examination. Its implementation will not only improve the quality of issued patents, but make the patent literature a more robust source of technical information. This Article contributes to broader policy debates over patent reform and joins a larger effort to bridge the disconnect between patent law and the norms of science.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 58

Keywords: Novelty, Disclosure, Enablement, Prior Art, Innovation, Invention, Possession

JEL Classification: O31, O32, O33, O34, O38, O40

Accepted Paper Series





Download This Paper

Date posted: March 3, 2010 ; Last revised: March 12, 2013

Suggested Citation

Seymore, Sean B., Rethinking Novelty in Patent Law (February 24, 2010). Duke Law Journal, Vol. 60, pp. 919-976, 2011. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1558617

Contact Information

Sean B. Seymore (Contact Author)
Vanderbilt University - Law School ( email )
131 21st Avenue South
Nashville, TN 37203-1181
United States
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 1,789
Downloads: 360
Download Rank: 46,530
Citations:  1
Footnotes:  47
Paper comments
No comments have been made on this paper

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo5 in 0.344 seconds