 A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter...  Committee Prints - 第 16 頁United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on the Judiciary 著 - 1957完整檢視 - 關於此書
 | United States. Patent Office - 1964 - 972 頁
...of claim 12 and the prior art. The law is that the claimed subject matter is not patentable if this difference "between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art" is "such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made... | |
 | United States - 2000 - 1208 頁
...not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made... | |
 | United States. Congress. House. Committee on the Judiciary - 1951 - 246 頁
...103 is an attempt to state it in the statute. It refers to the difference between the subject matter to be patented and the prior art, meaning what was known before ; if this difference is such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time... | |
 | United States. Patent Office - 1952 - 170 頁
...not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 ~of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made... | |
 | United States. Patent Office - 1954 - 480 頁
...the courts. An invention which has been made, and which Is new In the sense that the same thing baa not been made before, may still not be patentable...patented and the prior art, meaning what was known before UK described in section 102. If this difference is such that the subject matter as a whole would have... | |
 | United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on the Judiciary - 1956 - 444 頁
...not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made... | |
 | United States. Congress. Senate. Judiciary - 1956 - 536 頁
...disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title [the prior art], if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made... | |
 | United States. Congress. Senate. Judiciary - 1960 - 1034 頁
...reason that, even though an invention is "new and useful" it is not patentable "if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made... | |
 | United States. Department of the Army - 1961 - 346 頁
...not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made... | |
 | United States. Congress. Senate. Judiciary - 1961 - 1928 頁
...the present statute, 35 USC 103, for convincing J the Commissioner of Patents that the— differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art I are such that the subject matter as a whole would not have been obvious at tin time the invention... | |
| |
