Patent Law Question

[jus2sho]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? OH

Person A invents a part, does not obtain a patent, but has been selling the parts commercially for 6 months. Person B designs the same part 6 months later and also sells commercially. Is person B able to obtain a patent? Would person A be in violation of person B's patent? Sorry for the off topic question. TIA

[FlyingRon]

No, in the simplistic case neither one is eligible for a patent. One of the requirements is novelty. You can't go and patent stuff that's been disseminated before even if you were the one to invent it.

[divgradcurl]

Originally Posted by FlyingRon

No, in the simplistic case neither one is eligible for a patent. One of the requirements is novelty. You can't go and patent stuff that's been disseminated before even if you were the one to invent it.

This is incorrect, at least currently, in the United States (may change if patent reform goes through this year). See 35 U.S.C. 102(b). If you are the one to invent something, you have a 12 month "grace period" between the first public disclosure and when you have to file.

Person A invents a part, does not obtain a patent, but has been selling the parts commercially for 6 months. Person B designs the same part 6 months later and also sells commercially. Is person B able to obtain a patent? Would person A be in violation of person B's patent? Sorry for the off topic question. TIA

Person B should not be able to obtain a patent, because the U.S. has a "first to invent" system -- the patent goes to the first party to invent something, or no patent is issued at all. Person A could obtain a patent, because they were the first inventor, so long as they filed within 12 months of the first public disclosure.