Section » Patent Prosecution

New Trial for Inconsistent Verdict of Nonobvious Independent Claim, Obvious Dependent Claims

New Trial for Inconsistent Verdict of Nonobvious Independent Claim, Obvious Dependent Claims

By • on March 3, 2010

JMOL on validity reversed because judge misunderstood when art is analogous; claim constructions using dictionary and prosecution argument upheld. A JMOL on validity of the dependent claims to cure an inconsistent jury verdict for obviousness of  claims dependent on nonobvious  independent claims could not stand because the district court’s basis

No CommentsRead this story »

More Articles

Patents Obvious Over Same Prior Art Raised During Ex Parte Reexamination

Patents Obvious Over Same Prior Art Raised During Ex Parte Reexamination

By • on March 3, 2010

Dissent finds a bias against protecting an invention that “does not advance rocket science or cancer medicine.” A divided Federal Circuit panel affirmed summary judgment that claims in Media Tech’s two patents to trading cards with attached items or fragments of memorabilia were obvious over prior

No CommentsRead this story »

A Tale of Two Entrepreneurs

A Tale of Two Entrepreneurs

By • on June 22, 2009

A comparison of two recent Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (“Board”) decisions demonstrates the difficulty of establishing nonobviousness, to the Board’s satisfaction, through evidence of commercial success. While in KSR Int’l v. Teleflex Inc. the Supreme Court rejected a “rigid

No CommentsRead this story »