16:51
law schools that ghost should give you your money back
Warning
Info
Warning
Info
LSDefine
Simple English definitions for legal terms
double patenting
Read a random definition: bookie
A quick definition of double patenting:
Double patenting is when someone tries to get two patents for the same invention or for an invention that is too similar to one that has already been patented. This is not allowed and can result in the rejection or invalidation of the patent. There are two types of double patenting: same-invention double patenting and obviousness-type double patenting. Same-invention double patenting is when someone tries to patent the same thing twice, while obviousness-type double patenting is when someone tries to patent a small change to an already patented invention.
A more thorough explanation:
Double patenting refers to the act of obtaining two patents that cover the same invention. This can happen in two ways:
- Statutory double patenting: This occurs when an inventor tries to patent an invention that is the same as another invention they have already patented or have a pending patent application for.
- Obviousness-type double patenting: This occurs when an inventor tries to patent an invention that is an obvious variation of another invention they have already patented or have a pending patent application for.
Double patenting is not allowed, and it can result in the rejection of a patent application, the limitation of a patent's term through a terminal disclaimer, or the invalidation of a patent claim.
An example of statutory double patenting would be if an inventor patented a new type of phone case and then tried to patent the same phone case with a different color. Since the two inventions are the same subject matter, the second patent application would be rejected.
An example of obviousness-type double patenting would be if an inventor patented a new type of phone case with a built-in battery and then tried to patent the same phone case with a slightly larger battery. Since the second invention is an obvious variation of the first invention, the second patent application would be rejected.