. While traveling through Germany (a WTO member country) in December 2010, Thomas (a Canadian citizen) conceived of binoculars for use in bird watching. The binoculars included a pattern recognition device that recognized birds and would display pertinent information on a display. Upon Thomas’ return to Canada (a NAFTA country) in January 2011, he enlisted his brothers Joseph and Roland to help him market the product under the tradename “Birdoculars.” On February 1, 2011, without Thomas’ knowledge or permission, Joseph anonymously published a promotional article written by Thomas and fully disclosing how the Birdoculars were made and used. The promotional article was published in the Saskatoon Times, a regional Canadian magazine that is also widely distributed in the United States.
Thomas first reduced the Birdoculars to practice on March 17, 2011 in Canada.A United States patent application properly naming Thomas as the sole inventor was filed on September 17,2011.The application was rejected by the USPTO as being anticipated by the Saskatoon Times article.
A) On what statutory ground/provision could the USPTO examiner have handed out the rejection?Why?
B) How would Thomas rebut the USPTO rejection,to secure patent protection for his claims..?