EXPECTATION. The act of doing or taking something before its right time. (2) Trust deeds often provide that the income from the estate must be paid by the trustee as it is incurred and not in advance. A payment contrary to that provision would not be considered a discharge from the trustee. In the law of negligence, anticipation refers to the knowledge that there is a reasonable probability that the consequences of a particular person`s conduct will lead to harm to others. If the prior art reveals a range that touches or overlaps with the claimed area, but no specific examples fall within the claimed area are disclosed, anticipation should be made on a case-by-case basis. In order to anticipate claims, the claimed subject matter must be disclosed in the reference with “sufficient specificity to represent anticipation under the law.” What constitutes “sufficient specificity” depends on the facts. If the claims are directed to a narrow range and the reference teaches a wider range, other facts of the case must be taken into account in determining whether the narrow range is disclosed with “sufficient specificity” to represent an anticipation of the claims. Compare ClearValue Inc. v. Pearl River Polymers Inc., 668 F.3d 1340, 101 USPQ2d 1773 (Fed.

Cir. 2012) with Atofina v. Great Lakes Chem. Corp, 441 F.3d 991, 999, 78 USPQ2d 1417, 1423 (Fed. Cir. 2006). “To serve as anticipation when the reference is silent on the alleged inherent characteristic, such a gap in the reference can be filled by resorting to extrinsic evidence. This evidence must make it clear that the missing descriptive material is necessarily present in the question described in the reference and that it would be recognized by persons with ordinary expertise. Continental Can Co.

USA v. Monsanto Co., 948 F.2d 1264, 1268, 20 USPQ2d 1746, 1749-50 (Fed. Cir. 1991) (The Court went on to state that “this modest flexibility, as a general rule, that anticipation requires that each element of the claims appear in a single reference, takes into account situations where the general knowledge of technologists is not listed in the reference; that is, when the technological facts are known to those who work in the field of invention, even if they are not known to the judges. “948 F.2d to 1268, 20 USPQ to 1749-50.). It should be noted that as long as there is evidence of a dossier justifying inherence, the fact that traders do not simultaneously recognise a property, function or ingredient inherent in a reference to prior art does not preclude the determination of anticipation. Atlas Powder Co. v. IRECO, Inc., 190 F.3d 1342, 1349, 51 USPQ2d 1943, 1948 (Fed. Cir.

1999) (Two prior art references revealed abrasives containing water-in-oil emulsions with components identical to those claimed in areas overlapping with the claimed composition. The only element of the claims, which was probably not present in the prior art compositions, was “sufficient ventilation. to significantly increase sensitivity. The Federal Circuit noted that the emulsions described in the two references would inevitably and inherently have “sufficient aeration” to sensitize the compound in the claimed areas based on the recorded evidence (including test data and expert testimony). This finding of inherence was not nullified by the fact that one of the references taught away from air pockets or targeted ventilation.). See also In re King, 801 F.2d 1324, 1327, 231 USPQ 136, 139 (Fed. Cir. 1986); Titanium Metals Corp. v. Banner, 778 F.2d 775, 782, 227 USPQ 773, 778 (Fed. Cir.

1985). See MPEP § 2112 – § 2112.02 for case law on inherence. Also note that the critical day of extrinsic evidence proving a universal fact does not have to be before the filing date. See MPEP § 2124. The performance of an act or obligation before it is legally due. In patent law, the publication of the existence of an invention that has already been patented or for which a patent is pending constitutes a ground for refusal of patent on an invention that has essentially the same structure and function as the earlier invention.