by Steve Driskill | Dec 17, 2015 | [sub] secondary considerations, Obviousness
The patentee need not necessarily establish an independent nexus between the products produced under a license agreement and the claimed invention for licensing activity to be a relevant secondary factor in the obviousness inquiry. Here, for example, the fact that the...
by Steve Driskill | Dec 17, 2015 | [sub] teaching away, Obviousness
The teachings of a later prior art reference generally outweigh contradictory statements in an earlier prior art reference. Here, for example, although an earlier prior art reference clearly taught away from the claimed invention by stating that the claimed “5-MTHF”...
by Steve Driskill | Dec 17, 2015 | [sub] printed matter, Claim Interpretation
Unless claimed directly, origin identification does not constitute printed matter under the printed matter doctrine. Here, for example, the origin of certain web design code snippets (or “assets”) recited as being “authored by third party authors” was found not to...
by Steve Driskill | Dec 15, 2015 | [sub] covered business methods, PTO Procedure
The electronic sale of something, including charging a fee to a party’s account, is a financial activity that is subject to Covered Business Method (CBM) review. Here, for example, the sale of digital audio and video signals for a fee through telecommunications lines...
by Steve Driskill | Dec 15, 2015 | [sub] specification, Estoppel / Disclaimer
Any combination that is thoroughly disparaged in the specification will be generally found to be disclaimed from the ultimate claim scope. Here, for example, the fact that the specification was rife with remarks that disparage more complex mobile devices incorporating...
