Summary: Board’s decision rejecting certain claims of a patent relating to improved air or gel cushions as anticipated affirmed. Board’s decision upholding certain claims of the patent as nonobvious reversed.
Case: K-Swiss Inc. v. Glide’n Lock GmbH, No. 2013-1316, -1317 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 23, 2014) (non-precedential). On appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Before Lourie, Dyk and Wallach.
Procedural Posture: Third-party requester appealed from a decision of the Board in a reexamination upholding certain claims of a patent as nonobvious. The patent owner cross-appealed the Board’s decision that certain claims were invalid as anticipated. CAFC affirmed-in-part, reversed-in-part, and remanded.
- Invalidity: The Federal Circuit affirmed the Board’s decision rejecting certain claims of a patent relating to improved air or gel cushions as anticipated, finding that the Board’s findings were supported by substantial evidence. The Federal Circuit reversed the Board’s decision upholding certain claims of the patent as nonobvious because substantial evidence did not support the Board’s finding that the claims would not have been obvious over the cited prior art references.