#obviousness

[ follow ]
#patent-law #federal-circuit #claim-construction #inter-partes-review #patent-litigation #ptab #ipr #patent-appeal
fromIPWatchdog.com | Patents & Intellectual Property Law
5 days ago

CAFC Partially Affirms PTAB Unpatentability Decision for Samsung but Vacates on Unchallenged Claims

U.S. Patent No. 9,491,542 is titled "Automatic Sound Pass-Through Method and System for Earphones" and was challenged by Samsung via inter partes review (IPR) after ST1 sued Samsung for infringement. Samsung argued that claims 1-10 and 13- 20 of the patent were invalid due to obviousness based on three prior art references: Rosenberg, Ichimura and Visser. The PTAB ultimately found all of the challenged claims obvious over combinations of the prior art, but also found unchallenged claims 11 and 12 unpatentable without explanation.
Intellectual property law
Intellectual property law
fromPatently-O
2 weeks ago

When Obviousness Rejections Pile On: Rethinking Multi-Reference Combinations

Combining numerous prior art references to reject a patent claim often reflects hindsight and risks improper obviousness findings; doctrinal tests already address this.
#patent-law
more#patent-law
#federal-circuit
more#federal-circuit
Intellectual property law
fromPatently-O
4 months ago

Executive Branch Ethics: Why PTAB Judges Can Own Stock That Would Disqualify Article III Judges

PTAB judge stock ownership in petitioner did not require vacatur of institution and final written decisions; failure to consider copying evidence warranted relief.
frompatentlyo.com
4 months ago

Thanks for Your Input: Federal Circuit Ignores USPTO's 101 Framework (Again)

The Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB determination that claims directed to vehicle identification systems for ridesharing services were unpatentable for obviousness, but reversed the Board's grant of Rideshare's motion to amend substitute claims. Judge Hughes, writing for the panel, held that the substitute claims were directed to patent-ineligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101 because they merely used technology as a tool to improve user experience rather than improving computer functionality itself.
fromIPWatchdog.com | Patents & Intellectual Property Law
7 months ago

CAFC Upholds Win for Janssen on Patent for Antipsychotic Med Dosing Regimen

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed that Teva Pharmaceuticals did not prove the claims of Janssen Pharmaceuticals' patent for antipsychotic dosing regimens invalid for obviousness.
Law
[ Load more ]