In a recent opinion by the Federal Circuit, Auris Health, Inc. v Intuitive Surgical Operations, Inc., Case 2021-1732, the panel split on the weight of general industry skepticism in an obviousness analysis and split on...more
6/2/2022
/ Appeals ,
Evidence ,
Expert Testimony ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Inventions ,
Inventors ,
Motivation to Combine ,
Obviousness ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Prior Art ,
Remand ,
Substantial Evidence Standard ,
USPTO ,
Vacated
The PTAB Strategies and Insights newsletter provides timely updates and insights into how best to handle proceedings at the USPTO. It is designed to increase return on investment for all stakeholders looking at the entire...more
6/1/2022
/ Appeals ,
Appointments Clause ,
Arthrex Inc v Smith & Nephew Inc ,
Claim Construction ,
Clear and Convincing Evidence ,
Constitutional Challenges ,
Damages ,
Director of the USPTO ,
Evidence ,
Experimental Use Exception ,
Expert Testimony ,
Federal Vacancies Reform Act ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Inventions ,
Inventors ,
Motivation to Combine ,
Obviousness ,
On-Sale Bar ,
Patent Applications ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Petition For Rehearing ,
Post-Grant Review ,
Prior Art ,
Remand ,
Section 102 ,
Separation of Powers ,
Substantial Evidence Standard ,
USPTO ,
Vacated