[Patent Pod] General Motors v. General Electric
1 view
Skip to first unread message
Andrew Lahser
Aug 10, 2005, 1:45:34 AM8/10/05
to mypat...@googlegroups.com
[http://www.patentpod.com/sound/2005/august/GM-v-GE.mp3]
The C.A.F.C. considered whether the sale of G.M.'s planetary bearings constituted experimental use. Under section 102(b), sale of a product more than one year before filing a patent application bars patentability, unless the inventor intended that the sale was for experimental use. The C.A.F.C. considered thirteen factors of experimental use and found that G.M. did not sufficiently exercise control over the use of the product and did raise G.E.'s awareness of the confidentiality or experimental nature of the use of the planetary bearings.
--
Posted by Andrew Lahser to Patent Pod at 8/09/2005 09:47:00 AM
The C.A.F.C. considered whether the sale of G.M.'s planetary bearings constituted experimental use. Under section 102(b), sale of a product more than one year before filing a patent application bars patentability, unless the inventor intended that the sale was for experimental use. The C.A.F.C. considered thirteen factors of experimental use and found that G.M. did not sufficiently exercise control over the use of the product and did raise G.E.'s awareness of the confidentiality or experimental nature of the use of the planetary bearings.
- MP3: General Motors v. General Electric (Fed. Cir. 2005) (citations omitted)
- PDF: General Motors v. General Electric (Fed. Cir. 2005) (full text)
- CAFC Narrows Experimentation Defense to the On Sale Bar
- CAFC addresses on-sale bar: importance of customer awareness to prove experimentation
- On Sale Bar Derails Locomotive Bearing Patents
--
Posted by Andrew Lahser to Patent Pod at 8/09/2005 09:47:00 AM
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages