Filewrapper

Prior art addressing different problem shows what was “common knowledge,” obviousness affirmed

In a decision Friday, the Federal Circuit affirmed the rejection of all claims subject to reexamination as obvious. The USPTO had rejected the claims based on a combination of three prior art references. The court provided an expansive discussion of obviousness post-KSR. The court noted that where the Federal circuit had gone wrong in KSR […]

Continue Reading →

USPTO publishes post-KSR obviousness examination guidelines

The USPTO guidelines for obviousness rejections post-KSR appear in today's Federal Register. The full guidelines can be found here, and are similar to the draft guidelines that surfaced some time ago. In a nutshell, examiners will officially have seven rationales upon which an obviousness rejection may rely: Combining prior art elements according to known methods […]

Continue Reading →

Finding of infringement of two patents affirmed, one reversed, damages award vacated

In a highly anticipated recent decision, the Federal Circuit affirmed the judgment of infringement against Vonage with respect to two Verizon patents, holding that the district court did not err in its construction of the disputed claim terms and that the claims were not obvious. With respect to a third patent, the Federal Circuit held […]

Continue Reading →

Federal Circuit makes previous nonprecedential obviousness opinion precedential

Today the Federal Circuit decided to change the status of Daiichi Sankyo Co. v. Apotex, Inc. (previously blogged about here), from nonprecedential to precedential. This is noteworthy because this was one of the first obviousness cases decided by the Federal Circuit after KSR, and dealt specifically with one of the Graham factors: the level of […]

Continue Reading →

Purified stereoisomer of compound in known mixture obvious in light of expected potency

In a decision today, the Federal Circuit reversed a district court's pre-KSR decision of nonobviousness. The claims were directed toward a particular isomer of a compound that was "substantially free" of other isomers. The prior art included a mixture that included the claimed isomer as well as a different isomer. The court found the claims […]

Continue Reading →

Federal Circuit affirms finding of no anticipation or obviousness, no mention of KSR to be found

The Federal Circuit yesterday affirmed a decision by the District Court for the District of Delaware upholding the validity of Reissue Patent 34,712 ("the '712 patent") and the injunction preventing infringement of the '712 patent. Specifically, the court affirmed the district court's decision that the prior art reference relied upon for the defendants' anticipation argument […]

Continue Reading →

Reversible error if BPAI fails to consider rebuttal evidence of nonobviousness

The Federal Circuit today vacated a decision by the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences affirming an examiner's obviousness rejection. The inventors submitted three declarations evidencing the nonobviousness of their invention (unexpected results and teaching away), but the Board did not consider the evidence, finding that it related only to an intended use of the […]

Continue Reading →

USPTO not bound by district court claim construction on reexamination; obviousness affirmed

The Federal Circuit today addressed claim construction and obviousness in the context of a reexamination appeal. The patentee argued that the USPTO was bound, in reexamination, to apply the claim construction given the patents by a district court when the patents were in litigation before reexamination. The court found that because the USPTO was not […]

Continue Reading →

Another patent invalid after KSR, with help from an innovative online litigation strategy

Peter Zura has an interesting post about a case in the Eastern District of Texas (one of the most popular districts for patent cases to be filed) where a patent was held to be both anticipated and, failing that, obvious in light of KSR. The court also addressed the concept of joint infringement, which the […]

Continue Reading →

Summary of proposed final KSR examining guidelines surfaces

The Patent Prospector is reporting that the summary of the USPTO's post-KSR obviousness examination guidelines recently sent to OMB has apparently surfaced. Note that this summary is not confirmed, but it comes from a typically reliable source. Either click below or head over to the Patent Prospector to read the summary. Update (11:15): another source […]

Continue Reading →

Stay in Touch

Receive the latest news and updates from us and our attorneys.

Sign Up