May 29, 2015

Federal Circuit Court Decisions For Week Ending May 22, 2015

Apple v. Samsung Elec., Nos. 2014-1335, 2015-1029, May 18, 2015 (Precedential) (3-0)

Key point(s):

  • If a trade dress is functional, it is not protectable.
  • 35 USC § 289 explicitly authorizes the award of a design patent infringer’s total profit from the article of manufacture bearing the patented design.

In re Holness, No. 2014-1824, May 20, 2015 (Non-precedential), US App. No. 11/204,754

Key point(s):

  • For anticipation, consider the examiner’s broadest reasonable interpretation of claim elements and whether such elements can be inherent in the prior art device.

Novartis Pharm. Corp., et al. v. Watson Labs., Inc., et al., Nos. 2014-1799, 2014-1800, and Novartis Pharm. Corp., et al. v. Par Pharma., Inc., et al., Nos. 2015-1061, 2015-1062, 2015-1120, 2015-1121, May 21, 2015 (Non-precedential)

Key point(s):

  • Even an obvious solution does not render an invention obvious if the problem solved was previously unknown.

Allvoice Developments US, LLC v. Microsoft Corp., No. 2014-1258, May 21, 2015 (Nonprecedential)

Key point(s):

  • Carefully review local rules for level of specificity required in infringement contentions.
  • When a claim is not directed towards a process, the subject matter must exist in tangible form to be eligible under 35 USC § 101.

Related Team: