IP Blog
secondary considerations
Limits on Obviousness - Beyond the Claim Elements
Here is a lesson on obviousness. The Federal Circuit agreed with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) that claims for a system to measure degradation of cooking oils in a deep fryer were non-obvious under 35 U.S.C. §103. The PTAB had found that a skilled artisan would not have been motivated to combine the identified references, and that secondary...
PTAB Rejects Secondary Considerations for Patentability
Even though there was no dispute that a commercially successful product encompassed challenged patent claims, the USPTO’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board held that a patent owner failed to show secondary considerations of non-obviousness. Arctic Cat, Inc. v. Polaris Industries, Inc., Case IPR2015-01781; Patent 8,827,028 B2 (PTAB Jan. 30 2017). The Patent Owner, the PTAB explained, failed to meet its...