I do not usually write about non-precedential Federal Circuit decisions, but I could not let the discussion of “simultaneous invention” in Columbia University v. Illumina, Inc., go without comment. As ...

LKQ Corp. v. GM Global Technology Operations LLC has brought attention to the ongoing debate surrounding design patent law, particularly with respect to the Rosen-Durling test for design patent ...

Tuesday at the U.S. Supreme Court, the justices heard arguments concerning a basic tenet of patent law. In addition to being new, any invention for patent must be deemed “nonobvious” over what is ...

Many inventions build on or combine previously known elements, requiring the Patent Office and courts to determine which combinations of, or improvement on, previously known elements are entitled to ...

“Refusing to compensate these inventors with a temporary monopoly power when they have satisfied a novelty standard jades their spirits and throws our system of innovation out of balance.” Recovering ...

Discussed here is "routine optimization," an approach to obviousness in cases where the gap between the prior art and patent claims appears to be one that the hypothetical person of ordinary skill in ...

The judgment in Aktiebolaget Hassle v Alphapharm gives valuable guidance about the ‘obvious to try’ doctrine to the owners of Australian patents. Barry Eagar argues that the judges stressed the ...

Sylvan Browne suggests a way to deal with the problem of hindsight bias when assessing the obviousness of a patent application So-called hindsight bias can affect the assessment of the obviousness of ...