Categories
Archives
Receive Email Updates
-
-
-
Certified Licensing Professionals, Inc., 2021 
Disclaimer
This blog, Patents4Life, does not contain legal advice and is for informational purposes only. Its publication does not create an attorney-client relationship nor is it a solicitation for business. This is the personal blog of Warren Woessner and does not reflect the views of Schwegman Lundberg & Woessner, or any of its attorneys or staff. To the best of his ability, the Author provides current and accurate information at the time of each post, however, readers should check for current information and accuracy.
-
- About Me
Warren D. Woessner
Pages
Archives
Category Archives: Obviousness
UCB, Inc. v. Accord Healthcare, Inc. – Can a Racemic Mixture be a “Lead Compound.”
UCB v. Accord, Appeal no. 2016-2610 et al. (Fed. Cir., May 23, 2018) may be headed to the Supreme Court, which prompted me to take another look at this opinion. This was a decision in Hatch-Waxman litigation, in which a … Continue reading
Posted in Obviousness
Tagged Federal Circuit, Hatch-Waxman, Judge Bryson, Judge Prost, Judge Stoll, Opinion, s. 103, Supreme Court, UCB v. Accord, Warren Woessner
Leave a comment
Ex parte Galloway – Two Correlations are Better than One
Although, somehow, examiners and PTAB Judges are supposed to refrain from considering anticipation or obviousness when evaluating claim elements for the “inventive step” required for patent eligibility, that’s just not possible. The claims in Ex parte Galloway were directed to … Continue reading
Posted in Obviousness, PTAB
Tagged Ex Parte Galloway, minichromosome, Obviousness, PSA, PTAB, PTO, s. 101
Leave a comment
In re NuVasive, Inc. – Explain Yourself!
In re NuVasive Emphasizes the Importance of Reasoning in the Obviousness Question. Since KSR, 127 S.Ct. 1727 (2007), repudiated as “rigid and mandatory” the Federal Circuit “rule” for obviousness – that the prior art must provide a teaching, suggestion or … Continue reading
Posted in Obviousness
1 Comment
PTO Proposes Revisions to the Duty of Disclosure (“Rule 56”)
After issuing a brief “notice” in 2011, shortly after the Fed. Cir. revised the duty of disclosure in the Therasense (76 FR at 43631), the PTO has now published a notice of proposed rulemaking to gather comments on its specific … Continue reading
Posted in Obviousness
Leave a comment