Public Use Must Be for Intended Purpose of Invention to Trigger § 102(b) Bar
Client Alert | 1 min read | 05.31.07
In Motionless Keyboard Company v. Microsoft Corporation (No. 05-1497; May 29, 2007), the Federal Circuit affirms the district court’s decision of non-infringement but reverses the decision of invalidity. The two patents at issue, directed to an ergonomic keyboard, were developed by an independent inventor, who “traversed the patent system on a limited budget.” The district court held that both patents were invalid as the inventor demonstrated prototypes of his invention more than one year before the respective patent applications were filed.
On appeal, the Federal Circuit states that the public-use bar of 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) does not apply to either patent. The demonstration of one invention was protected by a non-disclosure agreement. With respect to the demonstration of the other invention, the panel holds that the prototype “was never connected to be used in the normal course of business to enter data into a system.” The panel distinguishes the instant facts from those in the Supreme Court’s 1881 decision in Egbert v. Lippman and concludes that “the disclosures in this record do not rise to the level of public use.”
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 4 min read | 09.12.25
SBA’s OHA Further Defines Extraordinary Action in SDVOSB Appeal
On September 4, 2025, the Small Business Administration’s (SBA) Office of Hearings and Appeals (OHA) granted an appeal challenging SBA’s determination that a service-disabled veteran did not control an entity applying for Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) status based on a minority owner’s ability to block certain actions in the matter of VSBC Appeal of: Blue Skye Foods, LLC, SBA No. VSBC-442-A.
Client Alert | 6 min read | 09.11.25
U.S. Department of Commerce Partially Relaxes Export Controls on Syria
Client Alert | 9 min read | 09.11.25
Client Alert | 1 min read | 09.10.25