|
| This Article | ||
| ||
| Share | ||
| Bibliographic References | ||
| Add to: | ||
 Digg  Furl  Spurl  Blink  Simpy  Google  Del.icio.us  Y!MyWeb | ||
| Search | ||
| ||
Five strategies for overcoming obviousness
November/December 2006 (vol. 26 no. 6)
pp. 72, 70-71
| ASCII Text | x | ||
| Philip G. Emma, "Five strategies for overcoming obviousness," IEEE Micro, vol. 26, no. 6, pp. 72, 70-71, November/December, 2006. | |||
| BibTex | x | ||
| @article{ 10.1109/MM.2006.110, author = {Philip G. Emma}, title = {Five strategies for overcoming obviousness}, journal ={IEEE Micro}, volume = {26}, number = {6}, issn = {0272-1732}, year = {2006}, pages = {72, 70-71}, doi = {http://doi.ieeecomputersociety.org/10.1109/MM.2006.110}, publisher = {IEEE Computer Society}, address = {Los Alamitos, CA, USA}, } | |||
| RefWorks Procite/RefMan/Endnote | x | ||
| TY - MGZN JO - IEEE Micro TI - Five strategies for overcoming obviousness IS - 6 SN - 0272-1732 SP72, 70 EP71 EPD - 72, 70-71 A1 - Philip G. Emma, PY - 2006 KW - patents KW - government KW - law VL - 26 JA - IEEE Micro ER - | |||
DOI Bookmark: http://doi.ieeecomputersociety.org/10.1109/MM.2006.110
Among rejections issued by the US Patent and Trademark Office, by far the most refer to section 103 of US Code Title 35.Patents, which says, basically, "Although your invention may be new, it's also obvious." Philip Emma explores five strategies for overcoming an obviousness rejection: arguing nonworkability, different universes, or opposition to normal practice; claiming a combination patent; and "peeling the onion."
Index Terms:
patents, government, law
Citation:
Philip G. Emma, "Five strategies for overcoming obviousness," IEEE Micro, vol. 26, no. 6, pp. 72, 70-71, Nov.-Dec. 2006, doi:10.1109/MM.2006.110
Usage of this product signifies your acceptance of the Terms of Use.