Tag Archives: Judge Lourie

K/S HIMPP v. Hear-Ware Technologies, LLC – Splitting a KSR Hair

In KSR, the Court seemed to encourage the broader use of the “logic, judgment, and common sense available to the person of ordinary skill that do not necessarily require explication in any reference” to resolve the obviousness question.  587 F.3d … Continue reading

Posted in Obviousness | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

In re Bergstrom – A Lost Precedent That Should Be “Found”

Since I do a lot of commentary, I read a lot of commentary, and have been struck by how the PTO s. 101 Guidelines on “Laws of Nature” have been criticized as if they are free from the constraints of … Continue reading

Posted in Patent Eligible Subject Matter | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Lightning Ballast II – Judge Lourie Tries to Get to “The Facts of the Matter”

After reading all 88 pages of this very scholarly opinion which left patent law right where it was post-Cybor – no matter how much weight the parties and amici felt stare decisis deserved – I went back and read Judge Lourie’s concurrence. It is mercifully … Continue reading

Posted in Claim Interpretation | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment