35-usc-103
10 cases — ← All topics
| Case | Title | Lower Court | Docketed | Status | Flags | Tags | Question Presented |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 23-739 | Jodi A. Schwendimann, fka Jodi A. Dalvey v. Neenah, Inc., et al. | Federal Circuit | 2024-01-09 | Denied | 35-usc-103 federal-circuit-review ksr-standard ksr-v-teleflex obviousness patent-law primary-reference prior-art wbip-v-kohler yeda-v-mylan | In conducting an obviousness analysis under 35 U.S.C. § 103, did the Federal Circuit err in holding that there "is no basis in our case law" for requi… | |
| 23-575 | Fleur Tehrani v. Hamilton Technologies LLC | Federal Circuit | 2023-11-28 | Denied | 35-usc-103 federal-circuit obviousness patent patent-invalidation patent-law posita prior-art | 1. Whether the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit erred by declaring a non-expert as a POSITA despite all the evidence presented to the contrary… | |
| 22-11 | SawStop Holding LLC v. United States Patent and Trademark Office, et al. | Federal Circuit | 2022-07-05 | Denied | Response Waived | 35-usc-101 35-usc-102 35-usc-103 judicial-authority non-statutory-double-patenting patent patent-eligibility patent-law statutory-interpretation ultra-vires | The Patent Act adopted by Congress provides that a person shall be entitled to a patent if an invention meets three conditions: the eligibility condit… |
| 21-893 | Apotex Inc., et al. v. Cephalon, Inc., et al. | Federal Circuit | 2021-12-16 | Denied | 35-usc-103 drug-reformulation inventive-process ksr-v-teleflex motivation motivation-to-combine obviousness obviousness-standard patent patent-law person-of-ordinary-skill prior-art | Whether claimed inventions involving reformulating and administering an old drug in ways that are no better than prior techniques, and which had been … | |
| 20-1119 | Amarin Pharma, Inc., et al. v. Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA Inc., et al. | Federal Circuit | 2021-02-16 | Denied | Amici (3)Response RequestedResponse WaivedRelisted (2) | 35-usc-103 graham-factors graham-v-john-deere hindsight-bias innovation innovation-protection nonobviousness-indicia objective-indicia obviousness-standard patent patent-law | Whether a court must consider objective indicia of nonobviousness together with the other factors bearing on an obviousness challenge before making an… |
| 20-158 | SRAM, LLC v. FOX Factory, Inc. | Federal Circuit | 2020-08-13 | Denied | Response Waived | 35-usc-103 commercial-success federal-circuit graham-v-john-deere nonobviousness objective-indicia patent-act patent-claim patent-law person-of-ordinary-skill secondary-considerations statutory-interpretation | In Graham v. John Deere Co. of Kansas City, 383 U.S. 1 (1966), this Court recognized the pivotal importance of "objective indicia" of nonobviousness (… |
| 19-966 | Emerson Electric Co. v. SIPCO, LLC | Federal Circuit | 2020-02-03 | GVR | Response RequestedResponse WaivedRelisted (2) | 35-usc-101 35-usc-103 35-usc-324 administrative-law america-invents-act cbm-patent covered-business-method judicial-review patent patent-review patent-trial-and-appeal-board statutory-interpretation | In the America Invents Act, Congress authorized the Patent Trial and Appeal Board to review whether certain patents, called Covered Business Method (C… |
| 18-1072 | James J. Macor v. United States Patent and Trademark Office | Federal Circuit | 2019-02-15 | Denied | Response Waived | 35-usc-102 35-usc-103 administrative-law analogous-art obviousness obviousness-standard patent patent-examination patent-law prior-art statutory-interpretation | In making rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious, what standard should be applied in determining whether prior art is "analogous," and, if the… |
| 18-692 | Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al. v. UCB, Inc., et al. | Federal Circuit | 2018-11-27 | Denied | Amici (3)Response Waived | 35-usc-103 double-patenting federal-circuit graham-factors graham-v-john-deere invention-disclosure lead-compound-test obviousness patent-eligibility patent-law patent-law-doctrine-of-double-patenting patent-validity prior-art | 1. This Court has long held that "no patent can issue for an invention actually covered by a former patent, especially to the same patentee." Miller v… |
| 18-441 | Accord Healthcare, Inc., et al. v. UCB, Inc., et al. | Federal Circuit | 2018-10-09 | Denied | Amici (1)Response Waived | 35-usc-103 lead-compound obviousness patent patent-invalidation patent-law pharmaceutical pharmaceutical-compound prior-art | Did the Federal Circuit commit error in holding that a patent claim to an obvious modification of a prior art compound was not invalid as obvious unde… |