This little blog is a way to keep track of useful, specific patent information in this rapidly changing world. It's not actual legal advice, however. Use at your own risk.
Showing posts with label teaching away. Show all posts
Showing posts with label teaching away. Show all posts
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Teaching Away--case law
"'A reference may be said to teach away when a person of ordinary skill, upon reading the reference, would be discouraged from following the path set out in the reference, or would be led in a direction divergent from the path that was taken by the applicant.'" Optivus Tech., Inc. v. Ion Beam Applications S.A., 469 F.3d 978, 989 (Fed. Cir. 2006) (quoting In re Kahn, 441 F.3d 977, 990 (Fed. Cir. 2006)); see also In re Fulton, 391 F.3d 1195, 1201 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (refusing to conclude that prior art disclosure taught away from the claimed invention where the disclosure did not "criticize, discredit, or otherwise discourage the solution claimed").
Monday, December 29, 2008
Teaching away.
A prior art reference must be considered in its entirety, i.e., as a whole, including portions that would lead away from the claimed invention. W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 220 USPQ 303 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984).
Analysis: The key is whether it would lead away because it wouldn't functionally work
Analysis: The key is whether it would lead away because it wouldn't functionally work
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)