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 | 01.07.26
On December 17, 2025, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a request for information (RFI) on a proposal designed to help the FDA engage more directly with innovative, venture-backed companies focused on biotechnology, medical devices, AI, and regulatory technology.[i]The RFI includes 19 questions, with responses due by 2:00 p.m. ET on January 18, 2026.
Client Alert | 3 min read | 01.07.26
CMMC for AI? Defense Policy Law Imposes AI Security Framework and Requirements on Contractors
Client Alert | 3 min read | 01.07.26
New Year, Same CIPA Uncertainty – When Will the Appellate Courts Enter the Chat?
Client Alert | 11 min read | 01.07.26

