Yes, it would be cited as prior art. If any section of 102 leads to the conclusion that the 2010 patent is prior art, then the 2010 patent is prior art. You are correct that the 2010 patent is not prior art under 102 (a)(2). However, it is prior art under 102(a)(1), at least as a printed publication. Because it qualifies as prior art under 102(a)(1), it is not necessary to determine what analysis, if any, of other 102 sections would find.
For this reason, when a patent is about to issue, we generally do some analysis to see if we want to file any type of continuation application - before the issuing patent becomes prior art.
Good luck,
Todd
Answered on Mar 14th, 2014 at 1:11 PM