The upcoming Celanese v. ITC case raises significant questions regarding whether sales of products made using secret processes invoke the on-sale bar, as amended by the AIA. This situation illustrates the tension between the recent changes in patent law—specifically the shift to first-to-file—and historical legal precedents. The AIA's updated definition of 'claimed invention' prompts careful consideration of its implications, as courts must reconcile statutory language with established legal interpretation to assess patent eligibility accurately.
In the context of the Celanese case, the narrowing definition of 'claimed invention' under the AIA must be reconciled with longstanding precedents to determine patent entitlement.
The shift from first-to-invent to first-to-file under the AIA introduces a tension in interpreting the on-sale bar and its applicability to secret processes.
Collection
[
|
...
]