624:. That is, if the inventor or the successor in title publishes the invention, an application can still be validly filed which will be considered novel despite the publication, provided that the filing is made during the grace period following the publication. The grace period is usually 6 or 12 months. In China, the grace period is 6 months. In Russia, the grace period is 6 months (Civil Code part IV, article 1350 (3)). In US, the grace period is 12 months ("Leahy-Smith America Invents Act")
656:
539:
464:
450:
invention is "new". A prior art search may for instance be performed using a keyword search of large patent databases, scientific papers and publications, and on any web search engine. However, it is impossible to guarantee the novelty of an invention, even once a patent has been granted, since some little known publication may have disclosed the claimed invention.
1139: : "I. Patentability; C. Novelty; 1. General" ("An invention can be patented only if it is new. An invention is considered to be new if it does not form part of the state of the art. The purpose of Art. 54(1) EPC is to prevent the state of the art being patented again (T 12/81, OJ 1982, 296; T 198/84, OJ 1985, 209).")
843:
A conceptual problem may arise in applying the point of novelty method of analysis when the elements at the point of novelty cooperate or co-act with the conventional elements or part of them in a novel way. The novel co-action is properly considered part of the point of novelty of the invention and
823:
that are conventional or known from those elements or limitations that are novel, i.e. not conventional or known. That part of the invention may also be termed its "point of departure from the prior art". The term is also applied to a patentability test – the point of novelty test – which determines
524:
A patent grants an inventor a legally enforceable monopoly over their invention. This means that others can be legally restrained from exploiting the invention. It is not the intention of the patent system to deny anyone what they have been free to do before someone claims an invention. For example,
910:
Present-day
American patent law still acknowledges that some parts of a patent claim may constitute "insignificant post-solution activity". This is regarded as a kind of "point of novelty" approach, disallowed under present (Federal Circuit) patent law. To combat infringement, truly "insignificant"
631:
members, any act that makes an invention available to the public, no matter where in the world, before the filing date or priority date has the effect of barring the invention from being patented. Examples of acts that can make an invention available to the public are written publications, sales,
962:
The section does not restrict disclosure to prior patents, giving a broad description of what includes prior disclosure; so long as the subject-matter was disclosed “in such manner that the subject-matter became available to the public”, the subject-matter is barred from being patented. This may
525:
one cannot patent the wheel, as that would exclude others from doing what they had previously been free to do. The legal test is that the invention must be something new, i.e. it must possess "novelty". The invention of the wheel is not new, because the wheel already forms part of the prior art.
449:
is usually performed, the term "art" referring to the relevant technical field. A prior art search is generally performed with a view to proving that the invention is "not new" or old. No search can possibly cover every single publication or use on earth, and therefore cannot prove that an
1243:
See In re Gulack, 703 F.2d 1381, 1385 n.8 (Fed. Cir. 1983) ("A printed matter rejection is based on case law antedating the 1952 patent act, employing a point of novelty approach. The 1952 act legislatively revised that approach through its requirement that the claim be viewed as a whole in
911:
elements are routinely kept out of patent claims. The purpose of the patent-eligibility doctrine concerning insignificant post-solution activity, however, is that adding such limitations to a claim does not involve adding an "inventive concept" to the otherwise ineligible underlying idea.
807:
referred to "anticipation" as "convenient" terminology to cover "that part of the state of art which is inconsistent with the invention being new". Anticipation and infringement are two sides of the same coin: that which anticipates earlier in time would infringe later in time.
835:, the conventional parts of the claim elements are placed in a preamble, such as "In a grease gun comprising a cylinder enclosing a piston longitudinally movable in said cylinder, said cylinder having a nozzle at a distal end thereof", which is followed by a
946:(a) more than one year before the filing date by the applicant, or by a person who obtained knowledge, directly or indirectly, from the applicant, in such a manner that the subject-matter became available to the public in Canada or elsewhere;
914:
The "contribution approach" in
European patent law is similar to the American "point of novelty" approach. It is supposed to be invalid, but it is still being applied under various guises in order to avoid counter-intuitive results.
1396:, a comparative study of grace periods applicable for assessing novelty (by IPR-Helpdesk, a project of the European Commission DG Enterprise, co-financed within the fifth framework programme of the European Community)
839:
such as "the improvement comprising", which is followed by a recitation of the element or elements constituting the point of novelty, such as "said nozzle having a fluted opening at a distal end thereof".
1191:
Dicta on
Adrenalin(e): Myriad Problems with Learned Hand's Product-of-Nature Pronouncements in Parke-Davis v. Mulford. 2011. Journal of Patent and Trademark Office Society. 93/4, 363-99. J.M. Harkness
1124:
756:
410:
963:
include prior patents, publications or the invention itself being put on display. Disclosures in a private document, such as an internal memo that is not available to the public, do not count.
1200:
The
Isolation and Purification Exception to the General Unpatentability of Products of Nature. 2002. Columbia Science and Technology Law Review. 4/. R.S. Gipstein. doi: 10.7916/stlr.v4i0.3626
636:
859:
The
Federal Circuit has at times criticized use of the point of novelty test in obviousness analysis, but the Supreme Court has continued to use a point of novelty test for obviousness. In
725:
can be patented in its pure form. This judicial tradition, allowing patenting of isolated natural products in the US, continued for over 100 years. Another notable example of it was
852:
1182:
Myriad and its implications for patent protection of isolated natural products in the United States. 2014. Chin Med. 9/17. A.Y. Wong, A.W. Chan. doi: 10.1186/1749-8546-9-17.
929:
666:
639:. The priority year starts when the first filing in a contracting state of the Paris Convention is made, while the grace period starts from the pre-filing publication.
1280:
949:(b) before the claim date by a person not mentioned in paragraph (a) in such a manner that the subject-matter became available to the public in Canada or elsewhere;
1076:
A prior art reference must not only disclose every feature of a claim, but must also disclose the features arranged or combined in the same way as the claim.
1008:
855:
formerly used the point of novelty test for design patents as the basis of a patent infringement analysis, but the court recently abandoned that test in
952:(c) in an application for a patent that is filed in Canada by a person other than the applicant, and has a filing date that is before the claim date;
1378:
1101:
1399:
152:
943:
28.2 (1) The subject-matter defined by a claim in an application for a patent in Canada (the “pending application”) must not have been disclosed
1248:
of the limitations of the claims, including the printed matter limitations, in determining whether the invention would have been obvious.").
333:
1389:
147:
137:
380:
appears simple and self-explanatory, this view is very far from reality. Some of the most contentious questions of novelty comprise:
696:
586:
560:
511:
485:
1046:
if the invention was previously invented in the U.S. by another, who has not abandoned, suppressed, or concealed the invention, or
442:, if the priority of an earlier patent application is claimed, the invention is not considered new and therefore not patentable.
803:
refers to advance use or disclosure of an otherwise-patentable invention, thereby undermining its novelty. The United
Kingdom's
642:
Local novelty only regards publications, uses or sales that have taken place within that jurisdiction to be novelty destroying.
1209:
788:, can be patentable. It is worth noting, that the denial of patentability in this case was not based on novelty, but rather on
357:, whose purpose is to prevent issuing patents on known things, i.e. to prevent public knowledge from being taken away from the
737:
564:
489:
1257:
See
Sakraida v. Ag Pro, Inc., 425 U.S. 273 (1976); Anderson’s-Black Rock, Inc. v. Pavement Salvage Co., 396 U.S. 57 (1969).
1049:
if the invention was described in a patent application filed by another, where the application later issues as a US patent.
230:
1307:
307:
549:
474:
1332:
David Vaver, Intellectual
Property Law: Copyright Patents Trade-Marks, 2d ed (Toronto: Irwin Law Inc., 2011) at 321.
986:
convey information so that a person grappling with the same problem must be able to say "that gives me what I wish";
1025:
1014:
1043:
having the invention published in a fixed medium (such as in a patent, patent application, or journal article); or
992:
in the absence of explicit directions, teach an "inevitable result" which "can only be proved by experiments"; and
568:
553:
493:
478:
1129:
1058:
789:
743:
414:
194:
173:
122:
870:
326:
235:
142:
1150:
718:
1036:
In the United States the four most common ways in which an inventor will be barred under
Section 102 are:
628:
256:
983:
give information which for the purpose of practical utility is equal to that given by the subject patent;
1267:
1096:
777:
769:
678:
613:
403:
200:
91:
60:
55:
1021:
which, among other things, are new. The central legal provision governing the novelty under the EPC is
761:
710:
1057:
occurs when one prior art reference or event discloses all the features of a claim and enables one of
999:
The current test now requires that only 1 of the 8 tests be fulfilled in order to find anticipation.
881:
727:
65:
368:
is anticipated (i.e. not new) and therefore not patentable if it was known to the public before the
1414:
1091:
1085:
935:
836:
319:
302:
225:
215:
210:
205:
106:
989:
give information to a person of ordinary knowledge so that he must at once perceive the invention;
747:(2000), courts confirmed patentability of recombinant DNA molecules, which encode known proteins.
1293:
1213:
893:
875:
866:
435:
373:
178:
86:
81:
1301:
1173:
Patenting New Uses for Old
Inventions. 2020. Vanderbilt Law Rev. 73/2, 479-534. S.B. Seymore.
1070:
899:
773:
617:
251:
220:
127:
1384:
887:
750:
The practice of patenting isolated products of nature came to an end only in 2013, when the
266:
96:
717:, who had been only 2 years in his position as a judge, "had made an uninformed mistake in
1393:
1062:
861:
709:
Another controversial issue in novelty analysis is whether a discovery and isolation of a
396:
292:
271:
261:
604:
In some countries, such as the Australia, Canada, China, Japan, Russia, United States, a
17:
820:
804:
732:
439:
1408:
1353:
Tye-Sil Corp. v. Diversified Products Corp. (1991), 35 CPR (3d) 350 at 361, 362 (FCA)
828:) by considering the point(s) of novelty after dissecting out the conventional part.
781:
431:
369:
358:
350:
832:
714:
609:
605:
427:
385:
354:
297:
50:
1061:
to make and use the invention. The term "features" in this context refers to the
1022:
825:
621:
538:
463:
934:
In Canada, the requirements for novelty are codified under section 28.2 of the
819:
is a term used in patent law to distinguish those elements or limitations in a
409:
patenting things, which are newly discovered in (or isolated from) nature (see
722:
377:
276:
1040:
by making the invention known or allowing the public to use the invention; or
1018:
977:
give directions which will inevitably result in something within the claims;
446:
365:
157:
445:
To assess the novelty of an invention, a search through what is called the
635:
The grace period should not be confused with the priority year defined by
1122:
Legal Research Service for the Boards of Appeal, European Patent Office,
785:
434:. In contrast, if an invention was known to the public before filing a
101:
1374:
1362:
MoneyIN, Inc. v. VeriSign, Inc., 545 F.3d 1359, 1371 (Fed. Cir. 2008)
995:
satisfy all these tests in a single document without making a mosaic.
751:
45:
1216:, paragraph 21, published 26 October 1995, accessed 16 November 2022
731:, where a court reversed the Patent Office’s refusal to patent on
384:
inventor's own prior disclosures (only a few countries provide a
1342:
Reeves Brothers Inc. v. Toronto Quilting & Embroidery Ltd.
765:
649:
532:
457:
1088:- concept analogous to Point of novelty, but in copyright law
665:
deal primarily with the United States and do not represent a
1386:
Grace Period and Invention Law in Europe and Selected States
757:
Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc.
411:
Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc.
389:
1214:
Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc. v H N Norton & Co Ltd
637:
Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property
632:
public oral disclosures and public demonstrations or use.
1118:
1116:
674:
1149:
World Intellectual Property Organization (June 2023).
853:
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
966:
There is an eight-pronged test to determine whether
1225:
Peters v. Active Mfg. Co., 129 U.S. 530, 537 (1889)
1151:"Certain aspects of national/regional patent laws"
930:Novelty and non-obviousness in Canadian patent law
1244:determining obviousness. The CCPA has considered
891:, the Court used the opposite approach. Then in
772:claim. At the same time, the Court decided that
1281:Software patents under United States patent law
1053:In U.S. patent law, a claim lacks novelty, and
940:
903:the Supreme Court went back to the test of the
115:Patentability requirements and related concepts
1017:(EPC), European patents shall be granted for
663:The examples and perspective in this section
646:Novelty in a discovery of a product of nature
327:
8:
1009:Novelty under the European Patent Convention
1125:Case Law of the Boards of Appeal of the EPO
567:. Unsourced material may be challenged and
492:. Unsourced material may be challenged and
1266:See generally the Knowledge (XXG) article
768:sequence in that case) does not deserve a
721:" by pronouncing that naturally occurring
681:, or create a new section, as appropriate.
334:
320:
29:
1323:, RSC 1985, c P-4, s. 28.2(1)(a) and (b).
697:Learn how and when to remove this message
587:Learn how and when to remove this message
512:Learn how and when to remove this message
1102:World Intellectual Property Organization
873:) under a point of novelty test, citing
738:Amgen, Inc. v. Chugai Pharmaceutical Co.
713:should be patentable. In 1911, Billings
1112:
980:give clear and unmistakable directions;
376:. Although the concept of "novelty" in
284:
243:
186:
165:
114:
73:
37:
32:
1299:
970:occurs in Canada. The prior art must:
857:Egyptian Goddess, Inc. v. Swisa, Inc.
844:should therefore properly be recited
7:
565:adding citations to reliable sources
490:adding citations to reliable sources
1294:"Patent Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. P-4)"
395:new uses of known things, such as
138:Inventive step and non-obviousness
25:
1400:British Patent Office regulations
936:Patent Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. P-4)
974:give an exact prior description;
654:
616:from authorised or unauthorised
537:
462:
627:In other countries, such as in
599:
1234:543 F.3d 665 (Fed. Cir. 2008).
413:) This question overlaps with
388:, most notably, 1 year in the
1:
426:Novelty is requirement for a
402:a broader question of (2) is
620:of the invention before the
187:By region / country
1375:Enlarged Concept of Novelty
865:the Supreme Court analyzed
744:Schering Corp. v. Amgen Inc
677:, discuss the issue on the
1431:
1128:(9th edition, July 2019),
1015:European Patent Convention
1006:
1003:European Patent Convention
927:
790:subject matter eligibility
600:Inventor's own disclosures
244:By specific subject matter
1059:ordinary skill in the art
848:the transitional phrase.
608:exists for protecting an
415:patentable subject matter
195:Patent Cooperation Treaty
174:Sufficiency of disclosure
153:Person skilled in the art
123:Patentable subject matter
18:Anticipation (patent law)
1306:: CS1 maint: location (
1296:. s.28.2. 25 March 2020.
871:statutory subject matter
824:patentability (usually,
438:, or before its date of
166:Other legal requirements
143:Industrial applicability
776:, which is produced by
960:
719:Parke-Davis v. Mulford
1344:, 43 C.P.R. (2d) 145.
1268:Exhausted combination
1097:Doctrine of inherency
885:as authority, but in
784:and does not contain
778:reverse transcription
770:composition-of-matter
404:inherent anticipation
27:Concept in patent law
1069:as explained in the
1065:of the claim or its
675:improve this section
561:improve this section
486:improve this section
1092:Disclaimer (patent)
1086:Analytic dissection
837:transitional phrase
74:Procedural concepts
1392:2011-08-12 at the
894:Mayo v. Prometheus
876:Neilson v. Harford
867:patent-eligibility
614:successor in title
436:patent application
374:patent application
353:requirement for a
179:Unity of invention
1071:all elements rule
900:Alice v. CLS Bank
882:O'Reilly v. Morse
774:complementary DNA
762:product of Nature
760:that an isolated
711:product of nature
707:
706:
699:
597:
596:
589:
529:Specific concepts
522:
521:
514:
344:
343:
16:(Redirected from
1422:
1363:
1360:
1354:
1351:
1345:
1339:
1333:
1330:
1324:
1318:
1312:
1311:
1305:
1297:
1290:
1284:
1277:
1271:
1264:
1258:
1255:
1249:
1241:
1235:
1232:
1226:
1223:
1217:
1207:
1201:
1198:
1192:
1189:
1183:
1180:
1174:
1171:
1165:
1164:
1162:
1160:
1155:
1146:
1140:
1136:
1132:
1120:
888:Diamond v. Diehr
817:Point of novelty
812:Point of novelty
702:
695:
691:
688:
682:
658:
657:
650:
592:
585:
581:
578:
572:
541:
533:
517:
510:
506:
503:
497:
466:
458:
336:
329:
322:
30:
21:
1430:
1429:
1425:
1424:
1423:
1421:
1420:
1419:
1405:
1404:
1394:Wayback Machine
1371:
1366:
1361:
1357:
1352:
1348:
1340:
1336:
1331:
1327:
1319:
1315:
1298:
1292:
1291:
1287:
1278:
1274:
1265:
1261:
1256:
1252:
1242:
1238:
1233:
1229:
1224:
1220:
1208:
1204:
1199:
1195:
1190:
1186:
1181:
1177:
1172:
1168:
1158:
1156:
1153:
1148:
1147:
1143:
1134:
1130:
1121:
1114:
1110:
1082:
1063:elements of art
1034:
1011:
1005:
932:
926:
921:
862:Parker v. Flook
814:
798:
728:In re Bergstrom
703:
692:
686:
683:
672:
659:
655:
648:
602:
593:
582:
576:
573:
558:
542:
531:
518:
507:
501:
498:
483:
467:
456:
424:
397:pharmaceuticals
340:
293:Patent analysis
257:Business method
28:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
1428:
1426:
1418:
1417:
1407:
1406:
1403:
1402:
1397:
1382:
1370:
1369:External links
1367:
1365:
1364:
1355:
1346:
1334:
1325:
1313:
1285:
1279:See generally
1272:
1259:
1250:
1236:
1227:
1218:
1202:
1193:
1184:
1175:
1166:
1141:
1111:
1109:
1106:
1105:
1104:
1099:
1094:
1089:
1081:
1078:
1051:
1050:
1047:
1044:
1041:
1033:
1030:
1007:Main article:
1004:
1001:
997:
996:
993:
990:
987:
984:
981:
978:
975:
959:
958:
957:
956:
953:
950:
947:
928:Main article:
925:
922:
920:
917:
813:
810:
805:House of Lords
797:
794:
733:prostaglandins
705:
704:
669:of the subject
667:worldwide view
662:
660:
653:
647:
644:
601:
598:
595:
594:
545:
543:
536:
530:
527:
520:
519:
470:
468:
461:
455:
452:
423:
420:
419:
418:
407:
400:
393:
349:is one of the
342:
341:
339:
338:
331:
324:
316:
313:
312:
311:
310:
305:
300:
295:
287:
286:
282:
281:
280:
279:
274:
269:
264:
259:
254:
246:
245:
241:
240:
239:
238:
233:
228:
223:
218:
213:
208:
203:
198:
189:
188:
184:
183:
182:
181:
176:
168:
167:
163:
162:
161:
160:
155:
150:
145:
140:
135:
130:
125:
117:
116:
112:
111:
110:
109:
104:
99:
94:
89:
84:
76:
75:
71:
70:
69:
68:
63:
58:
53:
48:
40:
39:
35:
34:
26:
24:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1427:
1416:
1413:
1412:
1410:
1401:
1398:
1395:
1391:
1388:
1387:
1383:
1380:
1376:
1373:
1372:
1368:
1359:
1356:
1350:
1347:
1343:
1338:
1335:
1329:
1326:
1322:
1317:
1314:
1309:
1303:
1295:
1289:
1286:
1282:
1276:
1273:
1269:
1263:
1260:
1254:
1251:
1247:
1240:
1237:
1231:
1228:
1222:
1219:
1215:
1211:
1210:Lord Hoffmann
1206:
1203:
1197:
1194:
1188:
1185:
1179:
1176:
1170:
1167:
1152:
1145:
1142:
1138:
1127:
1126:
1119:
1117:
1113:
1107:
1103:
1100:
1098:
1095:
1093:
1090:
1087:
1084:
1083:
1079:
1077:
1074:
1072:
1068:
1064:
1060:
1056:
1048:
1045:
1042:
1039:
1038:
1037:
1032:United States
1031:
1029:
1027:
1024:
1020:
1016:
1010:
1002:
1000:
994:
991:
988:
985:
982:
979:
976:
973:
972:
971:
969:
964:
954:
951:
948:
945:
944:
942:
941:
939:
937:
931:
923:
919:Jurisdictions
918:
916:
912:
908:
906:
902:
901:
896:
895:
890:
889:
884:
883:
878:
877:
872:
868:
864:
863:
858:
854:
849:
847:
841:
838:
834:
829:
827:
822:
818:
811:
809:
806:
802:
795:
793:
791:
787:
783:
782:messenger RNA
779:
775:
771:
767:
763:
759:
758:
753:
748:
746:
745:
740:
739:
734:
730:
729:
724:
720:
716:
712:
701:
698:
690:
680:
676:
670:
668:
661:
652:
651:
645:
643:
640:
638:
633:
630:
625:
623:
619:
615:
611:
607:
591:
588:
580:
570:
566:
562:
556:
555:
551:
546:This section
544:
540:
535:
534:
528:
526:
516:
513:
505:
495:
491:
487:
481:
480:
476:
471:This section
469:
465:
460:
459:
453:
451:
448:
443:
441:
437:
433:
429:
421:
416:
412:
408:
405:
401:
398:
394:
391:
387:
383:
382:
381:
379:
375:
371:
370:priority date
367:
362:
360:
359:public domain
356:
352:
351:patentability
348:
337:
332:
330:
325:
323:
318:
317:
315:
314:
309:
306:
304:
301:
299:
296:
294:
291:
290:
289:
288:
283:
278:
275:
273:
270:
268:
265:
263:
260:
258:
255:
253:
250:
249:
248:
247:
242:
237:
236:United States
234:
232:
229:
227:
224:
222:
219:
217:
214:
212:
209:
207:
204:
202:
199:
196:
193:
192:
191:
190:
185:
180:
177:
175:
172:
171:
170:
169:
164:
159:
156:
154:
151:
149:
146:
144:
141:
139:
136:
134:
131:
129:
126:
124:
121:
120:
119:
118:
113:
108:
105:
103:
100:
98:
95:
93:
90:
88:
85:
83:
80:
79:
78:
77:
72:
67:
64:
62:
59:
57:
54:
52:
49:
47:
44:
43:
42:
41:
36:
31:
19:
1385:
1358:
1349:
1341:
1337:
1328:
1320:
1316:
1288:
1275:
1262:
1253:
1245:
1239:
1230:
1221:
1205:
1196:
1187:
1178:
1169:
1157:. Retrieved
1144:
1123:
1075:
1066:
1055:anticipation
1054:
1052:
1035:
1012:
998:
968:anticipation
967:
965:
961:
933:
913:
909:
904:
898:
892:
886:
880:
874:
860:
856:
850:
845:
842:
833:Jepson claim
830:
821:patent claim
816:
815:
801:Anticipation
800:
799:
796:Anticipation
755:
749:
742:
736:
726:
715:Learned Hand
708:
693:
684:
664:
641:
634:
626:
606:grace period
603:
583:
574:
559:Please help
547:
523:
508:
499:
484:Please help
472:
444:
428:patent claim
425:
386:grace period
363:
355:patent claim
346:
345:
298:Pirate Party
132:
128:Inventorship
107:Infringement
51:Patent claim
1159:14 November
1067:limitations
826:obviousness
754:decided in
741:(1991) and
622:filing date
231:Netherlands
87:Prosecution
82:Application
1415:Patent law
1321:Patent Act
1108:References
1023:Article 54
1019:inventions
1013:Under the
723:adrenaline
618:disclosure
577:March 2017
502:March 2017
432:patentable
422:Definition
378:patent law
252:Biological
92:Opposition
33:Patent law
687:June 2023
679:talk page
612:or their
548:does not
473:does not
454:Rationale
447:prior art
366:invention
267:Insurance
201:Australia
158:Prior art
102:Licensing
97:Valuation
66:Criticism
61:Economics
38:Overviews
1409:Category
1390:Archived
1302:cite web
1080:See also
673:You may
610:inventor
440:priority
308:Glossary
303:Category
285:See also
272:Software
262:Chemical
1377:on the
786:introns
569:removed
554:sources
494:removed
479:sources
372:of the
347:Novelty
221:Germany
148:Utility
133:Novelty
56:History
924:Canada
907:case.
752:SCOTUS
430:to be
216:Europe
206:Canada
46:Patent
1154:(PDF)
905:Flook
846:after
831:In a
735:. In
226:Japan
211:China
197:(PCT)
1381:site
1379:WIPO
1308:link
1161:2023
897:and
879:and
851:The
552:any
550:cite
477:any
475:cite
1246:all
1026:EPC
955:...
780:of
766:DNA
764:(a
629:EPO
563:by
488:by
364:An
277:Tax
1411::
1304:}}
1300:{{
1212:,
1137:.1
1115:^
1073:.
1028:.
938::
792:.
392:);
390:US
361:.
1310:)
1283:.
1270:.
1163:.
1135:c
1133:.
1131:i
869:(
700:)
694:(
689:)
685:(
671:.
590:)
584:(
579:)
575:(
571:.
557:.
515:)
509:(
504:)
500:(
496:.
482:.
417:.
406:;
399:;
335:e
328:t
321:v
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.