Global Inquiries: Printed Publications (“patented or described in a printed publication”)
a.    ”patented” = Material that wouldn’t be counted as being published in a publication. (SA23)
(A)    Question arises wrt foreign countries that don’t publish patents and give a different set of patent rights. If the system gives “meaningful exclusive rights” it counts as a patent.
(B)    If invention comes under being patented but is not published, then only the claims of the patent count, as opposed to the entire patent (written description, specification, etc) for US patents.
b.    Jockmus (C5P57): P holds patent on light bulb holder in shape of a candle. D asserts lack of novelty because P’s invention was anticipated by a picture of a similar product in a catalogue distributed to French customers.
(A)    Issue: Was the catalogue sufficient disclosure? Picture didn’t show how one part was fastened, may have been different. Holding: Patent was anticipated
(B)    Reasoning
(1)    ”We know of no rule that figures can never of themselves be an adequate anticipation of mechanical inventions, as of course they must be of designs, and we can see no reason for importing into the statute an arbitrary distinction, unrelated to its purposes.” Finds possible differences to be equivalent.
(2)    For purposes of the patent, printed publications are not limited to formal publications. Catalogue was distributed to the public, at least 50 and as much as 1000 went out, no evidence of disruption in distribution.
c.    The “publication” requirement: Printed info will be deemed a publication if in practicality, the info was accessible to the public, i.e. an interested American exercising reasonable diligence, could obtain the information.
In re Cronyn (C5P62): Undergraduate thesis describing applicant’s invention had been available in main library of a college and in chem library, both of which indexed the theses separately from other books by author’s last name. Court claimed this wasn’t meaningfully public by not being generally indexed or cataloged. Not a sharp distinction from Rosaire.
d.    A prior art reference (including a printed publication) cannot anticipate an invention unless the reference is enabling. Seymour v Osborne. (C5P29)