“General Knowledge” is Alive and Well When Analyzing Obviousness

February 18, 2020

In Koninklijke Philips N.V. v. Google LLC et al.,1 the Federal Circuit reaffirmed that the “general knowledge” of a person of ordinary skill in the art can be used to supply a missing claim limitation in an obviousness analysis during inter partes review under 35 USC § 311(b). Google LLC (“Google”) filed a petition with the Patent Trial and Appeal… Read more »

Interference-in-Fact Decision Highlights Importance of Reasonable Expectation of Success to Find Obviousness

September 18, 2018

While the recent holding in Univ. of California v. Broad Institute, Inc.1, will certainly have long-reaching and important implications in the fight for control over CRISPR-based technology, the Federal Circuit’s opinion also provides additional confirmation that an obviousness determination must demonstrate a “reasonable expectation of success” when combining references from the prior art. The case arises… Read more »

Federal Circuit Provides Insight Into “Analogous” Art

February 06, 2018

A recent decision from the Federal Circuit, though nonprecedential, may help provide some boundaries to the scope of analogous art in the context of an obviousness rejection. In Smith & Nephew Inc., v. Hologic, Inc.,1 the Federal Circuit determined that a prior art reference used to establish a prima facie case of obviousness by the USPTO Examiner, did not… Read more »

That Which Is Unknown Cannot Be Obvious

January 16, 2018

In Honeywell v. Mexichem, the Federal Circuit found that the PTAB committed legal error during an inter partes reexamination by improperly relying on inherency to find obviousness and in its analysis of motivation to combine references.1 The claims of the patent owned by Honeywell are directed to a heat transfer composition that is a mixture of the tetrafluoroproene… Read more »

Federal Circuit Indicates Secondary Considerations . . . Just Need to be Considered

December 05, 2017

A recent decision from the Federal Circuit indicates that the order in which a court considers evidence attempting to demonstrate non-obviousness is not important, so long as it is considered. In prosecution, this translates to an increased need for strong declarations when traversing obviousness rejections. In Eli Lilly and Co. v. Perrigo Co., the United States… Read more »

Let's Get Started

Tel: (703) 712-8531

Address
Medler Ferro Woodhouse & Mills PLLC
8201 Greensboro Drive, Suite 1060
McLean, VA 22102

Phone and Fax
tel: (703) 712-8531
fax: (703) 712-8525