Latest Posts › Obviousness

Share:

Voluminous Expert Testimony and Exhibits Insufficient on Their Own to Warrant Denial of IPR Institution

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board granted institution of inter partes review of a patent directed to delivery of targeted television advertisements. The board rejected patent owner’s argument that a lack of particularity as...more

PTAB Reverses Course and Finds Challenged Patent Claims Unpatentable in Light of Applicant Admitted Prior Art

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board granted a request for rehearing of a final written decision in which it had originally determined that the challenged were not unpatentable. On rehearing, the board found that petitioner’s...more

IPR Petition Denied Due to Expert’s Lack of Relevant Experience

A recent board decision denying inter partes review serves as a reminder that an expert opining on obviousness must at least meet the definition of an ordinarily skilled artisan. The patent at issue related to a...more

Industry Praise of Consumer Hair Product Sufficient to Rebut Bald Obviousness Allegations

In a recent inter partes review proceeding, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board relied on compelling evidence of secondary considerations to hold all challenged claims not unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103. Specifically, the...more

Strength of Objective Indicia from Prior Litigation Overcomes Strong Obviousness Challenge in IPR

In a recent inter partes review (IPR), a patent owner overcame a facially persuasive obviousness challenge by relying on evidence from an earlier litigation to establish objective indicia of nonobviousness. In RTI...more

Federal Circuit: PTAB May Not Institute on Grounds Left out of IPR Petition

The Federal Circuit recently addressed whether the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) can institute inter partes review (IPR) on a ground not advanced by the petitioner, as well as whether the general knowledge of a person...more

Far-Reaching Effect of IPR Estoppel Dooms Invalidity Defense Based on Prior Art Product

Chief Judge Stark granted a patent owner’s motion for summary judgment of inter partes review (IPR) estoppel, holding that obviousness defenses based on a prior art product could not be asserted because a prior art...more

Calling a Printed Publication a “System” is Not Enough to Avoid IPR Estoppel

A Central District of California judge recently granted summary judgment of no obviousness based on inter partes review (IPR) estoppel because the only prior art references used to challenge patent validity could have been...more

Lack of Efficacy Data in Prior Art Dooms PTAB’s Unpatentability Finding for Method of Cancer Treatment Claims

The Federal Circuit recently overturned the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB) determination that claims covering a cancer treatment method were obvious. The patent at issue is directed to a method of treating...more

Withdrawal of Petitioner from IPR Proceeding All But Ensures Success in Contingent Motion to Amend

On remand from the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board granted patent owner’s motion to amend on the basis that the totality of the record did not demonstrate by a preponderance of the...more

References Introduced During IPR Proceeding Not Necessarily New Evidence to Which Patent Owner Had No Opportunity to Respond

On May 14, 2018, the Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (the “Board”) Final Written Decision in an inter partes review (IPR) proceeding holding all claims of Anacor Pharmaceuticals, Inc.’s (“Anacor”)...more

Swapping Order of References in Non-Instituted Obviousness Combination Does Not Alter Scope of IPR Estoppel

In an April 12, 2018 decision, the District Court for the District of Delaware held that a change in the primary reference of an obviousness combination that was denied institution by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)...more

In Rare Decision, PTAB Grants Request for Rehearing, Reverses its Prior Decision, and Institutes IPR

Requests for rehearing at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (the “Board”) are not uncommon; however, the Board rarely grants them. One reason for this result is the high standard applied to reverse a prior decision—abuse of...more

Moving From Everyday Dosing to Less Frequent Dosing is Obvious

In a consolidated Hatch-Waxman patent infringement action, a district court judge in Delaware recently found claims directed to a treatment for multiple sclerosis invalid as obvious....more

Patent Claims Directed to Treatment for Multiple Sclerosis Invalid as Obvious

In a consolidated Hatch-Waxman patent infringement action, a district court judge in Delaware recently found claims directed to a treatment for multiple sclerosis invalid as obvious....more

15 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"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:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide