FACTS :
(1) Parke-Davis (P) sued Mulford (D).
Because (D) made and sold a similar product.
(2) (D) appealed, claiming that the patents were invalid because the patents were only for a degree of purity and not a new “composition of matter.”
35 U.S.C. 101 Inventions patentable. - Patent Laws
35 U.S.C. 101 Inventions patentable.
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful p
_In case of patent trolls which do not produce goods, because they perform exercise of right aiming solely for monetary profit, not only large enterprises but also small & medium enterprises get involved in patent suits, which massive expense of monetary source is concerned according to the progress and result of the suit.
_ Protective patents of enterprises become useless to have protection f
(a) the invention was known or used by others in this country, or
patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign
country, before the invention thereof by the applicant for patent, or
(b) the invention was patented or described in a printed publication
in this or a foreign country or in public use or on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of the ap
35 U.S.C. § 102(a): Novelty
(2)Your invention was patented or describd in a printed publication in this or a foreign country
-before your invention was
-more than one year prior to your
application for a patent in the U.S.
35 U.S.C. § 102(a): Novelty
(3) Your invention was in public use in this country more than one year prior to your application for a