For meetings and deliveries:
12 Veterans Square
1st Floor Left
Media, PA 19063 U.S.A.
P.O. Box 209
Swarthmore, PA 19081-0209 U.S.A.
Phone: (610) 892-9942
Twitter: @TechLaw_Elman and @ElmanTechNews
eFax: (925) 226-4995
On May 30, 2012, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) put further gloss on the term “common sense” as used by the Supreme Court in the 2007 case of KSR v. Teleflex.
This new case (Mintz v. Dietz & Watson) involved a patent on casings for hot dogs with a woven mesh pattern. The CAFC opinion criticized the district court for finding the patent claim to have been obvious, under the “common sense” rubric. The CAFC explained that “common sense” is a “shorthand label for knowledge so basic that it certainly lies within the skill set of an ordinary artisan.”
- Supreme Court, snowed by ACLU smear campaign, resurrects archaic requirement of “invention” as a test of patent eligibility.
- State of Vermont Declares War on “Patent Trolls”
- Are Human Genes Patentable?—The Experts Weigh In
- Spark Your Creativity: participate online in Tina Seelig’s MOOC via Stanford’s Venture Lab
- Patentability: “non-obviousness” and “common sense”
- ALJ Essex Rules On Motion To Compel And For Adverse Inferences In Certain Acousto-Magnetic Electronic Article Surveillance Systems (337-TA-904)
- Duck, Duck, Goose? No, Says the Court - Aereo Remains Yet Another Duck
- Versata v. SAP: PTAB Decision Does Not Trump a Final Jury Verdict
- IPR Spotlight Series: What to Do When the PTAB Denies Your Petition to Institute IPR
- Errors in Reissue Patent Applications
- Insights from a Recent Panel on Navigating AIA Trials