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.”
- American Bar Ass’n to distribute FBI cyber-threat warnings
- Internet connectivity is the new “electricity”: Underwriters Labs (UL) meet The Third Wave
- Similar drawings, copyright infringement? Art Seidel showed a jury the answer was NO.
- Gerry Elman and Josh Waterston presented cybersecurity seminar at Delaware County Bar Association on Feb. 24, 2016
- Special invitation: FREE admission to hear Gerry Elman speak on Cybersecurity Litigation
- Implications of the Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016
- President Expected to Sign New Federal Trade Secret Law
- The Defend Trade Secrets Act Is Now Law
- The Federal Court of Appeal Determines the Incorrect Date to Assess Obviousness-Type Double Patenting, but Leaves the Determination of the Correct Date for Another Day
- USPTO Issues Subject Matter Eligibility Update with Examples for Life Sciences
- Total Concept and Feel: A Doctrine Running Amok?