The Federal Circuit's decision in Honeywell v. 3G Licensing highlights significant judicial debate over the role of appellate courts in patent validity assessments.
Judge Dyk's majority opinion reversed the PTAB's finding on obviousness, emphasizing that the claims related to protecting data bits in communication technology were indeed obvious.
Judge Stoll dissented, arguing that the majority overstepped by acting as a fact-finder, suggesting that a remand for further fact development was necessary.
The case potentially indicates future conflicts regarding the treatment of expert testimony in patent disputes, especially with the upcoming EcoFactor v. Google ruling.
Collection
[
|
...
]