Tag Archives: KSR

Obviousness Objections Based On Combinations Of References – Consistent Warnings From The CAFC

By Paul Cole, Professor of Intellectual Property Law, Bournemouth University; Lucas & Co, Warlingham, UK Those prosecuting patent applications before the USPTO, the EPO and other examining patent offices confront on a daily basis objections of the kind: “A is known … Continue reading

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

Innovation Toys And Analogous Art – Defender Against Hindsight?

There is nothing particularly surprising in the recent Fed. Cir. decision of Innovation Toys v. MGA Entertainment, App. No. 2010-1290 (Fed. Cir. March 21, 2011) (a copy is available at the end of this post), which reversed a District Court finding … Continue reading

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

Happy Birthday Patents4Life – We Are 2!

Now some of them are not yet carved in judicial stone, being at various stages of appeal, but the sum of KSR,  Bilski (well, I guess it was more pro-patent than the strict M or T test it replaced with … Continue reading

Posted in About SLW | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

AUTM Panel To Address A “Myriad” Of Challenges

Robert S. MacWright, J.D., Ph.D., the new head of tech transfer at the Salk Institute, will moderate a panel at the 2011 Annual Meeting of the Association of University Technology Managers (AUTM) on March 1st in Las Vegas.  The panel, … Continue reading

Posted in Patentable Subject Matter | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment