Anticipation. Andrew Reddon McCarthy Tetrault. Economic “Birthright”.
Section 2 – “new and useful”
"Their Lordships' conclusion therefore is that the knowledge and user of Bayer and his associates, before December 21, 1922, although in Denmark and although secret and confidential, and not made available to the public, was, upon the true construction of s. 7 of the Act of 1923, sufficient to invalidate the appellant's patent."
Baker Petrolite (FCA) – sale is not enough
Convenient List of factors. Anticipatory Reference Must:
(a) give an exact prior description
(b) give directions which will inevitably result in something within the claims ("the infringement test")
(c) give clear and unmistakable directions
(d) give information which for the purpose of practical utility is equal to that given by the subject patent
(e) convey information so that a person grappling with the same problem must be able to say "that gives me what I wish"
(f) give information to a person of ordinary knowledge so that he must at once perceive the invention [without experimentation]
(g) in the absence of explicit directions, teach an "inevitable result" which "can only be proved by experiments"
(h) satisfy all these tests in a single document without making a mosaic
1. For there to be anticipation there must be both disclosure and enablement of the claimed invention.
…. the co-pending application
…. has priority