News & Analysis as of

Obviousness

Nevro Corp. v. Boston Scientific Corp. (N.D. Cal. 2017)

Duty to Disclose Does Not Include Duty to Respond to Examiner Confusion - Earlier this month, in Nevro Corp. v. Boston Scientific Corp., District Judge Vince Chhabria of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of...more

Federal Circuit OK's Use of Post-Priority-Date Evidence

by Morgan Lewis on

The ruling found that the use of such evidence was proper for written description and enablement....more

In re Stepan Co. (Fed. Cir. 2017)

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) gets most of its attention (judicial and otherwise) regarding its decisions in inter partes review and covered business method proceedings. But the Board also has responsibility for...more

Federal Circuit Schools USPTO On Broadest Reasonable Claim Construction

by Foley & Lardner LLP on

In recent decisions, the Federal Circuit has found error in the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s approach to obviousness rejections, including its reliance on the doctrine of routine optimization without evidence of an...more

Reliance on Inherency in Obviousness Analysis: Not Cool

by McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated a decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board), finding that the PTAB erred by improperly relying on inherency to find obviousness and also conducted an...more

PTAB Must Articulate Factual Basis for Obviousness Determination

by McDermott Will & Emery on

Addressing whether a claimed feature was the result of routine optimization, as well as the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB or Board) obligation to consider factual evidence, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal...more

Corroboration of the Inventor is Necessary, but Evaluated Under a Rule of Reason, Considering the Totality of the Circumstances

In NFC Technology, LLC v. Matal, [2016-1808] (September 20, 2017), the Federal Circuit reversed the PTAB’s final written decision that claims of U.S. Patent 6,700,551 were obvious, and remanded for the board to determine...more

PTAB Grants Rare Rehearing Due To Insufficient Evidence Of Obviousness

by Jones Day on

In Coalition For Affordable Drugs VI, LLC v. Celgene Corp. (2015-01096, -01102, -01103), the PTAB granted Patent Owner Celgene’s request for rehearing of a final written decision that had found the challenged claims invalid...more

Fresh From the Bench: Precedential Patent Cases From the Federal Circuit

In In Re Cray, the panel grants Cray’s petition for a writ of mandamus, ruling that the district court’s handling of the case is not consistent with its case law regarding what is “a regular and established place of...more

CAFC Finds Harmless Error in USPTO Reliance On Doctrine of Inherency

by Foley & Lardner LLP on

In Southwire Co. v. Cerro Wire LLC, the Federal Circuit upheld the USPTO decision rendered in an inter partes reexamination proceeding that found Southwire’s patent invalid as obvious. Although the court found that the USPTO...more

When Your Background Dooms The Invention

37 CFR 1.77(b)(7) suggests that a patent application should include a “Background of the Invention.” The Background of the Invention, however, can cause trouble if the drafter is not careful....more

Federal Circuit Review - August 2017

by Knobbe Martens on

District Court Abused Discretion in Ignoring Federal Circuit Mandate to Reconsider Attorneys’ Fees Under Octane Fitness - In Adjustacam, LLC v. Newegg, Inc., Appeal No. 2016-1882, the Federal Circuit held that a district...more

Objective Indicia Were Properly Considered and Did Not Save Cookie Package Patent from Summary Judgment of Obviousness

In Intercontinental Great Brands LLC v. Kellogg North American Co., [2015-2082, 2015-2084] (September 7, 2017), the Federal Circuit affirmed summary judgment that Kraft’s U.S. Patent No. 6,918,532 was invalid for obviousness,...more

Mere Quantification of the Results of a Known Process is Not Patentable

In Southwire Co. v. Cerro Wire LLC, [2016-2287] (September 8, 2017), the Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB’s decision in an Inter Partes reexamination that the claims of U.S. Patent No. 7,557,301 on a method of making cable...more

Secondary Considerations Win Again

by Jones Day on

As we have previously discussed (on February 1, March 1, March 30, and May 19), reliance on secondary considerations of non-obviousness has been hit or miss for patent owners trying to convince PTAB panels that the secondary...more

Fresh From the Bench: Precedential Patent Cases From the Federal Circuit

Intercontinental v. Kellogg involves a fight between two food industry powerhouses, Kraft and Kellogg, in which a majority of the panel affirms summary judgment of obviousness of a patent directed to a resealable cookie...more

CAFC Vacates USPTO Single Reference Obviousness Rejection For Inadequate Showing Of Expectation of Success

by Foley & Lardner LLP on

In a split decision with Judge Lourie dissenting, the Federal Circuit vacated an obviousness rejection that had been affirmed in an ex parte appeal to the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The decision was rendered in In...more

Federal Circuit Cultivates Criteria for Obviousness Rejection: Rational Underpinning and Articulation Required to Establish...

The Federal Circuit vacated and remanded the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB) decision in In re Stepan Co., No. 2016-1811 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 25, 2017), because the PTAB “failed to adequately articulate its reasoning,...more

Judge Sleet Invalidates Patents-In-Suit After Finding Of Obviousness And Enters Judgment In Favor Of Alleged Infringer In...

by Fox Rothschild LLP on

Following a five-day bench trial in the matter in February 2017 and after having considered the entire record in the case and the applicable law, the Court, through Memorandum, entered by The Honorable Gregory M. Sleet in...more

Not Every Instance of an Agency Reaching Inconsistent Outcomes in Similar, Related Cases will Necessarily be Erroneous

In Vicor Corp. v. Synqor, Inc., [2016-2283] (August 30, 2017) the Federal Circuit affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded the Board’s decisions in two reexaminations, one in which the Board found that certain claims...more

Mylan Pharm. v. AstraZeneca AB (PTAB 2017)

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office recently issued a Final Written Decision in an inter partes review styled Mylan Pharm. v. AstraZeneca AB affirming the patentability of all challenged...more

Recent Design Decisions Provide Insight for Design Patent Prosecution

Three recent decisions relating to design patents provide useful insights into design patent prosecution. First, the PTAB recently instituted two IPR petitions directed to design patents, bringing the total number of...more

Fresh From the Bench: Precedential Patent Cases From the Federal Circuit

Today the Circuit agreed to hear en banc Nantkwest v. Matal,in which the panel had reversed a district court decision that had rejected the PTO’s position that applicants who appeal a district court must pay the PTO’s legal...more

Federal Circuit Rules in Favor of Public Interest Group Standing at PTAB

by Jones Day on

In Personal Audio, LLC. v. Electronic Frontier Foundation, No. 2016-1123 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 7, 2017), the Federal Circuit reviewed a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) decision invalidating claims of U.S. Patent No....more

Obviousness Requires Articulation; Routine Optimization Insufficient Alone

In Re Stepan Company , No. 2016-1811 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 25, 2017) - The Federal Circuit vacated a Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s obviousness decision for failing to adequately articulate its reasoning. The Stepan Company...more

567 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 23
Cybersecurity

"My best business intelligence,
in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.