Expert testimony [may be] required not only to explain what the prior art references disclosed, but also to show that a person skilled in the art would have been motivated to combine them in order to achieve the claimed...more
5/22/2013
- Expert Testimony Obviousness Patents Prior Art Rule 37
On April 16, 2013, in Bayer Schering Pharma AG v. Watson Pharm., Inc., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Lourie,* Schall, Prost) reversed the district court's summary judgment that U.S. Reissue Patent No....more
4/19/2013
- Bayer Patents Pharmaceutical Prescription Drugs Prior Art
On April 4, 2013, in Saffran v. Johnson & Johnson, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Lourie,* Moore, O'Malley) reversed the district court's judgment that Johnson & Johnson and Cordis Corp. infringed U.S....more
4/10/2013
- Disclaimers Infringement Medical Devices Patents Prior Art
"[A]nticipation by inherent disclosure is appropriate only when the reference discloses prior art that must necessarily include the unstated limitation, [or the reference] cannot inherently anticipate the claims."...more
1/31/2013
- Inter Partes Reexamination Patents Prior Art USPTO
"[A]lthough § 102(g) prior art must be somehow made available to the public in order to defeat another patent, a § 102(g) prior inventor is under no obligation to file a patent application." Commercialization has been relied...more
12/5/2012
- Patents Prior Art
