Article 84 of the European Patent Convention (EPC) requires that the claims of a European patent application “shall define the matter for which protection is sought” and “shall be clear and concise and be supported by the...more
One common rationale used to support an obviousness argument is that the patented solution would have been “obvious to try.” The Supreme Court has stated that where “there are a finite number of identified, predictable...more
In a recent precedential opinion, ABS Global Inc. v. Cytonome/ST, LLC, 984 F.3d 1017 (Fed. Cir. 2021), the Federal Circuit held that the disclaimer of a right to appeal a district court’s summary judgment of non-infringement...more
Occasionally, a patentee will seek to define its invention with claims that recite a negative claim limitation – a specialized category of claim element that recites an element that is expressly and deliberately excluded....more