Lexion Medical, LLC v. Northgate Techs., Inc., No. 04 C 5705, Slip Op. (N.D. Ill. Jun. 8, 2007).*
Judge Rosenbaum (a visiting judge, who is the Chief Judge for the District of Minnesota) denied defendants’ Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) for relief from the Court’s judgment. The Court held a trial in October 2006 resulting in a jury verdict that defendants’ insufflator (a device that blows a powder, gas or vapor into a body cavity) infringed plaintiff’s patent (you can read more about the case in the Blog’s archives). In their motion, defendants argued that the Supreme Court’s April 2007 obviousness decision, KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., __ U.S. __, 127 S.Ct. 1727 (2007), dramatically changed obviousness law and conflicted with the jury instructions which “nullif[ied] the jury verdict.” Defendants moved the Court to invalidate two claims of the patent in suit or to order a new trial on obviousness. But the Court held that even under the KSR standard, the jury’s verdict was fully supported by evidence at trial. Because a corrected instruction would not have changed the result, the erroneous instruction was harmless.
Continue Reading Pre-KSR Validity Verdict Upheld Under KSR Standard
Obviousness
First Post-KSR Fed. Cir. Obviousness Analysis
Leapfrog Enterprises, Inc. v. Fisher-Price, Inc., No. 06-1402, Slip Op. (Fed. Cir. May 9, 2007).
The Federal Circuit issued its first opinion analyzing an obviousness determination based upon the Supreme Court decision in KSR v. Teleflex, 550 U.S. __, 2007 WL 1237837 (2007). The Court affirmed the district court’s holding that the claim was invalid based upon obviousness and explained that obviousness is not determined by “a rigid formula disassociated from the consideration of the facts of a case.” You can download a copy of the Federal Circuit’s decision here.
…
Continue Reading First Post-KSR Fed. Cir. Obviousness Analysis
New KSR Obviousness Standard Resource
The Fire of Genius has just started an excellent KSR obviousness resource. At this page, the Fire of Genius is keeping a running tally of all cases dealing with obviousness pursuant to the KSR standard.
…
Continue Reading New KSR Obviousness Standard Resource
Obviousness Redux: Arm-chair Quarterbacking KSR v. Teleflex
KSR v. Teleflex, 550 U.S. __ (2007).
A unanimous Supreme Court rolled back the Federal Circuit’s teaching, suggestion or motivation obviousness test in favor of the Court’s prior, and substantially broader, test as set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co. of Kansas City, 383 U.S. 1 (1966). Justice Kennedy delivered the Court’s…
IP Day at the Supreme Court
The Supreme Court issued opinions in both Microsoft v. AT&T and KSR v. Teleflex. I just received the opinions, so I have not had time for analysis yet. But you can click on the links for the opinions and I will report back Tuesday or Wednesday with more analysis.
Rethinking Obviousness
Chicago Kent Professor, and former Fed. Cir. clerk, Tim Holbrook has published a very interesting article at the Washington University Law Review’s Slip Opinions blog. In the article, Holbrook attempts to sort out obviousness and poses a new obviousness standard which he argues takes the best of the current Federal Circuit approach and the Graham…
Jury’s Anticipation and Obviousness Determinations Are Not Supported By Legally Sufficeint Evidence
Black & Decker Inc. v. Robert Bosch Tool Corp., No. 04 C 7955, 2006 WL 3883286 (N.D. Ill. Dec. 18, 2006) (St. Eve, J.).*
Judge St. Eve granted judgment as a matter of law for plaintiff, holding that the jury’s findings of invalidity and obviousness were not supported by legally sufficient evidence. At trial, defendant…