Articles

Results 1 to 4 of 4
Most popular |Most recent


No prior conception where contemporaneous disclosures failed to show knowledge of complete and operative method of making invention

USA - April 30 2013 Addressing the issue of conception in an interference proceeding, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a decision by the U.S…

Prior art’s disclosure of result-effective variables that overlap claimed ranges is sufficient to support a finding of obviousness

USA - October 31 2012 In affirming a finding of obviousness by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that the prior art’s disclosure of dimensions that overlapped claimed ranges was sufficient to support a finding of obviousness, where the disclosed dimensions were result-effective variables.

Same claim terms used in related patents have the same meaning

USA - September 28 2012 Having vacated a district court’s finding of infringement by Hynix Semiconductor, Inc. in Hynix v. Rambus, (see IP Update, Vol. 14, No. 6), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a decision of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (the Board) in a reexamination proceeding, finding one of the patents asserted in the prior Hynix case invalid as anticipated based upon the construction of a disputed claim term.

Prior art's disclosure of a preferred embodiment does not “teach away” from inferior alternatives

USA - July 31 2012 In affirming a finding of obviousness by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (the Board), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that the disclosure of a preferred embodiment in a prior art reference does not teach away from a combination of prior art references that leads to the applicant’s invention, even when the combination is described as being inferior.