What could justify a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(f)?

A rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(f) is based on the idea that the applicant is not the true inventor of the claimed invention. This section indicates that the invention is not novel to the applicant if it has been disclosed or claimed by someone else who is the true inventor.

In this context, if the authorship of a referenced patent differs from the applicant's claims, it suggests that the applicant might not have the right to the invention because it was already invented by someone else. This is the fundamental reason why a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(f) can be justified: it establishes the connection between the disclosed subject matter in the referenced patent and the identity of the true inventor.

The other options present scenarios that do not relate directly to issues of inventorship under this specific statute. For instance, having the same author for all disclosed subject matter would not give rise to a rejection based on 102(f) because it implies that the submitting party is indeed claiming their own work. The complexity of an invention does not influence the inventorship question; it's about the credit for the idea or the creation itself. Lastly, an inappropriate filing date refers more to the timing of the invention rather than the ownership or authorship