Lawrence M. Sung

Lawrence M. Sung

BakerHostetler

Contact  |  View Bio  |  RSS

Latest Posts › Prior Art

Share:

BakerHostetler Patent Watch: Apple, Inc. v. Int'l Trade Comm'n

[E]vidence relating to all four Graham factors -- including objective evidence of secondary considerations -- must be considered before determining whether the claimed invention would have been obvious to one of skill in the...more

8/8/2013 - Apple Graham Factors Infringement ITC Motorola Obviousness Patents Prior Art

BakerHostetler Patent Watch: Cheese Sys., Inc. v. Tetra Pak Cheese and Powder Sys., Inc.

Where a court holds a claim obvious without making findings of secondary considerations, the lack of specific consideration of secondary considerations ordinarily requires a remand....more

8/8/2013 - Doctrine of Equivalents Infringement Obviousness Patents Prior Art Summary Judgment

Patent Watch: Regents of the Univ. of Minn. v. AGA Med. Corp.

In disclaiming claim coverage in light of certain prior art, the applicant does not thereby act as a lexicographer, redefining individual words....more

6/5/2013 - Medical Devices Patent Applications Patents Prior Art USPTO

Patent Watch: Alexsam, Inc. v. IDT Corp.

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

Patent Watch: Bayer Schering Pharma AG v. Watson Pharm., Inc.

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

Patent Watch: Saffran v. Johnson & Johnson

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

Patent Watch: In Re Morsa

On April 5, 2013, in In re Morsa, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Rader, Lourie, O'Malley*) affirmed-in-part, vacated-in-part and remanded the USPTO Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences decision...more

4/10/2013 - Enablement Inquiries Interference Proceeding Patents Prior Art USPTO

Patent Watch: Rexnord Indus., LLC v. Kappos

"[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

Patent Watch: C.W. Zumbiel Co. v. Kappos

[T]he preamble constitutes a limitation when the claim(s) depend on it for antecedent basis, or when it "is essential to understand limitations or terms in the claim body." On December 27, 2012, in C.W. Zumbiel Co. v....more

1/10/2013 - Appeals Inter Partes Reexamination Kappos Obviousness Patent-Eligible Subject Matter Patents Prior Art USPTO

Patent Watch: Fox Group, Inc. v. Cree, Inc.

"[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

10 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 1