article thumbnail

Federal Circuit Clarifies Standards to Establish Nexus Between Objective Evidence and Non-Obviousness, and to Establish Copying in Medtronic et al. v. Teleflex Innovations

Intellectual Property Law Blog

In this case, the Federal Circuit determined the sufficiency of evidence to rebut a nexus between objective evidence and non-obviousness; and to establish the objective indicia of copying. Medtronic failed to make a showing that objective evidence resulted from features that were known as a combination in the prior art. Patent Nos.

Copying 130
article thumbnail

Federal Circuit Rules on Written Description Requirement and Prior Art Statements Supporting a Motivation to Combine

Intellectual Property Law Blog

February 9, 2024) addressed two issues: (1) when the written description requirement is met in the context of a claimed range that is narrower than the ranges disclosed in the patent specification, and (2) the kind of prior art disclosure language which supports a finding of a motivation to combine for an obviousness rejection.

Art 130
Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Trending Sources

article thumbnail

O Prior Art, Prior Art, Wherefore Art Though Prior Art? 

Patently-O

In a new opinion the court asked and answerd an interesting question: What if most on-point prior art was accidentally created due to a typographical error? A key to the analysis was a finding that the error would have been apparent to someone of skill in the art. You can compare the prior art linear objective lens results (Fig.

Art 138
article thumbnail

Of Bass Notes and Base Rates: Avoiding Mistaken Inferences about Copying

43(B)log

61, 2023 Abstract To prove copyright infringement, a plaintiff must convince a jury that the defendant copied from the plaintiff’s work rather than independently creating it. Until that knowledge is available, testimony about the probability of copying should be deemed inadmissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 702.

Copying 64
article thumbnail

[Guest post] Jacquemus x Nike Swoosh Bag: ‘Just Copy It’ or re-appropriation of Nike’s own trade mark?

The IPKat

This time, Katfriend Spyridon Sipetas (Stockholm University) tells the story of a collaboration – the one between Jacquemus and Nike – that has been already plagued with accusations of copying. Here’s what Spyridon writes: Jacquemus x Nike Swoosh Bag: ‘Just Copy It’ or re-appropriation of Nike’s own trade mark?

Copying 104
article thumbnail

No Patents: How to Protect Product from Copying

Patent Trademark Blog

No patents: What are your options against product copies? Since your original product may qualify as prior art against a patent application for your new and improved product, adding non-obvious features will help make your new version more patentable. It’s understandable. To your surprise, the product does well.

Copying 98
article thumbnail

Using that classic piece of art on a book cover: Grr…

The IPKat

Works of art, in the form of the reproduction of a painting, frequently adorns the cover of a reissued edition of a renowned novel. What preoccupied Benjamin was how to understand the reproduction of works of art, especially in his seminal 1935 essay entitled, in English translation, "The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction”.

Art 134