Digest of In re: Magna Electronics, Inc. (Fed. Cir. May 7, 2015) (non-precedential). On appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Before Prost, Lourie, and Chen (per curiam).

Procedural Posture: Patentee appealed decision of PTAB affirming claim rejections in ex parte reexamination. CAFC affirmed.

  • Obviousness: PTAB correctly determined that claims in two patents directed to vehicular rearview vision systems were obvious. Regarding the first patent, substantial evidence supported the PTAB’s conclusion that (i) it would have been obvious to replace a CCD imager in a prior-art rearview vision system with a CMOS imager, as claimed; (ii) the patentee did not show a nexus between market share and the use of a CMOS camera; and (iii) evidence of high costs and other companies’ preferences did not rise to “skepticism of experts” that would support a finding of non-obviousness. Regarding the second patent, substantial evidence supported the PTAB’s conclusion that (i) a claim term requiring “indicating distances” was satisfied by distance markings (horizontal lines spaced at regular intervals) in graphic overlay, and (ii) the patentee did not show a nexus between secondary considerations and the claimed invention.