| 23-739 |
Jodi A. Schwendimann, fka Jodi A. Dalvey v. Neenah, Inc., et al. |
Federal Circuit |
2024-01-09 |
Denied |
|
35-usc-103 federal-circuit-review ksr-standard ksr-v-teleflex obviousness patent-law primary-reference prior-art wbip-v-kohler yeda-v-mylan |
Obviousness analysis under 35 U.S.C. § 103 |
| 23-575 |
Fleur Tehrani v. Hamilton Technologies LLC |
Federal Circuit |
2023-11-28 |
Denied |
|
35-usc-103 federal-circuit obviousness patent patent-invalidation patent-law posita prior-art |
Whether the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit erred in its analysis |
| 22-11 |
SawStop Holding LLC v. United States Patent and Trademark Office, et al. |
Federal Circuit |
2022-07-05 |
Denied |
Response Waived |
35-usc-101 35-usc-102 35-usc-103 judicial-authority non-statutory-double-patenting patent patent-eligibility patent-law statutory-interpretation ultra-vires |
Does the judiciary have the authority to require a patent applicant to meet a condition for patentability not required by the Patent Act? |
| 21-893 |
Apotex Inc., et al. v. Cephalon, Inc., et al. |
Federal Circuit |
2021-12-16 |
Denied |
|
35-usc-103 drug-reformulation inventive-process ksr-v-teleflex motivation motivation-to-combine obviousness obviousness-standard patent patent-law person-of-ordinary-skill prior-art |
Whether claimed inventions involving reformulating and administering an old drug in ways that are no better than prior techniques, and which had been … |
| 20-1119 |
Amarin Pharma, Inc., et al. v. Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA Inc., et al. |
Federal Circuit |
2021-02-16 |
Denied |
Amici (3)Response RequestedResponse WaivedRelisted (2) |
35-usc-103 graham-factors graham-v-john-deere hindsight-bias innovation innovation-protection nonobviousness-indicia objective-indicia obviousness-standard patent patent-law |
Whether a court must consider objective indicia of nonobviousness together with the other factors bearing on an obviousness challenge before making an… |
| 20-158 |
SRAM, LLC v. FOX Factory, Inc. |
Federal Circuit |
2020-08-13 |
Denied |
Response Waived |
35-usc-103 commercial-success federal-circuit graham-v-john-deere nonobviousness objective-indicia patent-act patent-claim patent-law person-of-ordinary-skill secondary-considerations statutory-interpretation |
Whether the Federal Circuit erred in holding that, under 35 U.S.C. § 103, before a nexus can be presumed between objective indicia of nonobviousness a… |
| 19-966 |
Emerson Electric Co. v. SIPCO, LLC |
Federal Circuit |
2020-02-03 |
GVR |
Response RequestedResponse WaivedRelisted (2) |
35-usc-101 35-usc-103 35-usc-324 administrative-law america-invents-act cbm-patent covered-business-method judicial-review patent patent-review patent-trial-and-appeal-board statutory-interpretation |
Whether 35 U.S.C. 324(e) permits review on appeal of the Director's threshold determination, as part of the decision to institute CBM review, that the… |
| 18-1072 |
James J. Macor v. United States Patent and Trademark Office |
Federal Circuit |
2019-02-15 |
Denied |
Response Waived |
35-usc-102 35-usc-103 administrative-law analogous-art obviousness obviousness-standard patent patent-examination patent-law prior-art statutory-interpretation |
Whether the standard for determining if prior art is 'analogous' in making rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious, and whether a finding of no… |
| 18-692 |
Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al. v. UCB, Inc., et al. |
Federal Circuit |
2018-11-27 |
Denied |
Amici (3)Response Waived |
35-usc-103 double-patenting federal-circuit graham-factors graham-v-john-deere invention-disclosure lead-compound-test obviousness patent-eligibility patent-law patent-law-doctrine-of-double-patenting patent-validity prior-art |
Whether a patentee may obtain a second patent on the same invention actually covered by a former patent to the same patentee |
| 18-441 |
Accord Healthcare, Inc., et al. v. UCB, Inc., et al. |
Federal Circuit |
2018-10-09 |
Denied |
Amici (1)Response Waived |
35-usc-103 lead-compound obviousness patent patent-invalidation patent-law pharmaceutical pharmaceutical-compound prior-art |
Whether the Federal Circuit erred in holding that a patent claim to an obvious modification of a prior art compound was not invalid as obvious under 3… |