Topic
Obviousness
205 published works
GT TechVenture Views
Understanding What to Keep Secret
Two of the most important requirements of patentability are that the invention must be novel and non-obvious at the filing date of the patent application. In the United States, the…
Re:Marks on Trademark and Copyright
Seeing Beyond the Doggie Wear: What MCR Innovations Teaches about the Obviousness of Design Patents in the Garment Industry
Reposted from Law A La Mode By: Tamar Duvdevani, Matt Ganas, and Amanda Liverzani In the United States, patent protection can be afforded to aesthetic innovation (design patents), and functional…
Delaware Intellectual Property Litigation
After Bench Trial, Judge Sleet Concludes that None of the Asserted Claims of the Patents-in-Suit Are Invalid Due to Obviousness
By Memorandum Opinion entered by The Honorable Gregory M. Sleet in Pfizer Inc., et al. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., C.A. No. 10-528-GMS (D.Del., October 22, 2014), the Court, following a…
Patents Post-Grant
Anticipating Non-Analogous Art Arguments at the PTAB
Setting the Level of Skill May be Critical in Niche Arts The obviousness of a claimed invention is assessed from the perspective of a hypothetical person of ordinary skill in…
Patents Post-Grant
Petitioner Over-Reaching at the PTAB Results in Adverse Summary Judgment
Stretching Prior Art Grounds Fatal to Petitioners In district court, 102 grounds are highly preferred to even the strongest 103 ground. This is because of the uphill battle in…
WinTech
Rebutting a Prima Facie Case of Obviousness
By Winstead
Obtaining a patent for an invention requires the crossing of many statutory hurdles. One of the main statutory hurdles is to rebut any contentions by a patent examiner that…
The Faculty Lounge
Design Patent Myths—Most designs can’t satisfy the requirement of “nonobviousness”
Another common design patent myth is that the Patent Act’s “nonobviousness” requirement is a very high barrier to protection for designs. In order to be patentable, a design must not…
Technology Law Source
Ammunition to rebut “obvious to try”
The recent Federal Circuit Court of Appeals decision in Leo Pharmaceutical Products, Ltd. v. Rea (Appeal No. 2012-1530, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 16610, decided Aug. 12, 2013) provides patent applicants…
IP Intelligence
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. On August 6, 2013, in…
IP Intelligence
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…