Obviousness United States Patent and Trademark Office

News & Analysis as of

Mixing Things Up: Let’s Talk Recipes, Part Two of a Four-Part Series (Patent)

Discussions about protecting intellectual property often focus on cutting-edge technologies, corporate branding campaigns, and widely distributed artistic works like movies and music. But let’s mix things up a bit. Follow...more

Preparing For The Obvious At The PTAB

There is little debate that inter partes reviews have proven to be an effective means of challenging the validity of a patent. During the first two-and-a-half years, more than 73 percent of claims originally challenged in IPR...more

MBHB Snippets: Review of Developments in Intellectual Property Law: Spring 2015 - Vol. 13, Issue 2

In This Issue: - After B&B Hardware, What is the Full Scope of Estoppel Arising From a PTAB Decision in District Court Litigation? - When You Don’t Know What You Know: The Role of Unappreciated Inherency in the...more

Nearly Expired Is Not the Same as Expired: The Board Clarifies Claim Construction Standards for Inter Partes Review - Apple, Inc....

Addressing the standard to be applied for claim construction during inter partes review (IPR) proceedings, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (PTO) Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) declined to create an...more

Federal Circuit Review | April 2015

No Recovery Of Lost Profits From Related Companies’ Activities - In WARSAW ORTHOPEDIC, INC. v. NUVASIVE, INC., Appeal Nos. 2013-1576, -1577, the Federal Circuit held that a company was not entitled to lost profits based...more

Recent IPR Guidance From a Trio of Forums

As inter partes review (IPR) practice continues to develop and practitioners feel their way around the edges, the last month brought helpful guidance from a trio of forums: the Federal Circuit, the Central District of...more

Combinations of Predictable Elements from the Prior Art Need Not Be Advantageous - Nuvasive, Inc. v. Warsaw Orthopedic, Inc.

Addressing the propriety of combining prior art in an obviousness analysis, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (PTO) Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB” or “Board”) determined that a patent for a spinal implant for...more

District Court Action Dismissed Without Prejudice Does Not Bar Filing of IPR Petition - Nautique Boat Co., Inc. v. Malibu Boats,...

Addressing whether a district court action dismissed without prejudice bars a filing of an inter partes review (IPR) petition under 35 U.S.C. § 315(a)(1), the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (PTO) Patent Trial and Appeal...more

Federal Circuit IPR Scoreboard PTAB: 2 Patent Owner: 0

Last week the Federal Circuit issued its first decision in an appeal of a final decision from a post-issuance review proceeding under the America Invents Act. In a 2-1 decision, the Federal Circuit affirmed a Patent Trial and...more

Obviousness Post KSR

On April 30, 2007 in KSR v Teleflex, the Supreme Court reaffirmed its view expressed many years ago that patents should not be granted for inventions that had too low a level of inventivity. As Justice Kennedy in a unanimous...more

Failure to Address All Graham Factors Dooms CBM Petition

Travelocity.com L.P. v. Cronos Technologies LLC - Addressing the showing required to institute covered business method (CBM) proceedings based on obviousness, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Patent Trial and...more

Patent Owner Bears Burden of Proving Proposed Claims Patentable

Harmonic, Inc. v. Avid Tech., Inc. - Addressing the patent owner’s burden of showing non-obviousness in an inter partes review (IPR), the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (PTO) Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB, or...more

Judge Crotty denies attorney and expert fees

In a matter related to Case no. 1:13–cv-01358–PAC, Abbvie requested attorney and expert fees following the court’s determination that U.S. Patent No. 7,846,442 (“Methods of treating rheumatoid arthritis with an anti-TNF-alpha...more

Examiner and Board Must Be Consistent in Prior Art-Based Rejections of Similarly-Worded Claims

Q.I. Press Controls, B.V. v. Lee - Addressing the issue of whether the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (PTO) Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (the Board) erred by rejecting some claims as obvious, but not...more

Is Evidence of Obviousness Always Required?

In K/S HIMPP v. Hear-Wear Technologies, LLC, the Federal Circuit affirmed the decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) that upheld the decision of the Central Reexamination Unit Examiner that refused to hold...more

IP Newsflash - May 2014

FEDERAL CIRCUIT CASES - Newsgroup Post Held to be A Printed Publication and Anticipatory Prior Art - On May 27, 2014, the Federal Circuit affirmed a decision granting summary judgment of invalidity by the...more

Protection of Designs in the United States

In recent years, protection of designs has become of increasing importance. As Steve Jobs famously noted: “People think it’s this veneer — that the designers are handed this box and told, ‘Make it look good!’ That’s...more

Negation of Motivation To Combine Defeats Obviousness - Institut Pasteur & Universite Pierre Et Marie Curie v. Focarino

Addressing a finding of obviousness by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (now the Patent Trial and Appeal Board) (Board) following inter partes reexamination, the U.S. Court of...more

Federal Circuit Reverses Board Rejections That Strayed From Claim Construction

In the non-precedential decision in In re Eaton, the Federal Circuit reversed the USPTO Board decision affirming rejections of anticipation and obviousness. The court found that the Board decision strayed from its own claim...more

Federal Circuit Review - October 2013

Late Payment of Patent Maintenance Fees Not Inequitable Conduct - In Network Signatures Inc, v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., Appeal No. 12-1492, The Federal Circuit reversed summary judgment of...more

Federal Circuit Vacates PTAB Decision Invalidating Rambus Patent

In Rambus, Inc. v. Rea, the Federal Circuit found several legal and procedural errors in the decision of the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) that invalidated certain claims of the Rambus patent as obvious. While...more

IP Update, Vol. 16, No. 9, September 2013

Patents/Preliminary Injunction: Preliminary Injunction Ordered Based on Appellate Claim Construction Aria Diagnostics, Inc. v. Sequenom, Inc. - Addressing a preliminary injunction filed by a defendant in a...more

Rambus Inc. v. Rea (Fed. Cir. 2013) - A Little Reminder to the PTO about Due Process and the Importance of Objective Evidence of...

In its decision on September 24th, the Federal Circuit reminded the Patent Office that the principles of due process are still alive and kicking and cannot be ignored by the Patent Office's judiciary. The case came to...more

Federal Circuit Finds Taclonex Patent Not Obvious, Reverses USPTO Decision

In Leo Pharmaceutical Products, Lt. v. Rae, the Federal Circuit issued a rare decision reversing an obviousness determination by the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)....more

Leo Pharmaceutical Products, Ltd. v. Rea (Fed. Cir. 2013)

The Federal Circuit's jurisprudence regarding obviousness as determined by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office continues its post-KSR development in Leo Pharmaceutical Products, Ltd. v. Rea, which involves an obviousness...more

30 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 2

"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 to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*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.
×