13 Cited authorities
In re NuVasive, Inc.
842 F.3d 1376 (Fed. Cir. 2016) Cited 109 times 16 Legal AnalysesVacating and remanding so that an agency could fulfill its obligation to "make the necessary findings and have an adequate evidentiary basis for its findings" and to "articulate a satisfactory explanation for its action"
Nidec Motor Corp. v. Zhongshan Broad Ocean Motor Co.
868 F.3d 1013 (Fed. Cir. 2017) Cited 13 times 9 Legal Analyses2016-2321 08-22-2017 NIDEC MOTOR CORPORATION, Appellant v. ZHONGSHAN BROAD OCEAN MOTOR CO. LTD., Broad Ocean Motor LLC, Broad Ocean Technologies LLC, Appellees Joseph MATAL, Performing the Functions and Duties of the Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Intervenor Scott R. Brown, Hovey Williams LLP, Overland Park, KS, argued for appellant. Also represented by Matthew B. Walters ; Christopher Michael Holman, University of Missouri-Kansas
Beloit Corp. v. Valmet Oy
742 F.2d 1421 (Fed. Cir. 1984) Cited 24 times 4 Legal AnalysesNoting we do not "sit to review what the Commission has not decided"
Section 103 - Conditions for patentability; non-obvious subject matter
35 U.S.C. § 103 Cited 6,159 times 489 Legal AnalysesHolding the party seeking invalidity must prove "the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains."
Section 102 - Conditions for patentability; novelty
35 U.S.C. § 102 Cited 6,023 times 1024 Legal AnalysesProhibiting the grant of a patent to one who "did not himself invent the subject matter sought to be patented"
Section 282 - Presumption of validity; defenses
35 U.S.C. § 282 Cited 3,965 times 142 Legal AnalysesGranting a presumption of validity to patents
Section 1 - Establishment
35 U.S.C. § 1 Cited 518 times 15 Legal AnalysesNoting that Congress did not intend to change these "narrowing interpretations"
Section 318 - Decision of the Board
35 U.S.C. § 318 Cited 161 times 140 Legal AnalysesGoverning the incorporation of claims added via the operation of § 316(d)
Section 42.100 - Procedure; pendency
37 C.F.R. § 42.100 Cited 192 times 75 Legal AnalysesProviding that the PTAB gives " claim . . . its broadest reasonable construction in light of the specification of the patent in which it appears"
Section 42.8 - Mandatory notices
37 C.F.R. § 42.8 Cited 11 times 12 Legal AnalysesRequiring a party to "[i]dentify each real party-in-interest for the party"
Section 42.65 - Expert testimony; tests and data
37 C.F.R. § 42.65 Cited 6 times 17 Legal AnalysesDiscussing "[e]xpert testimony"
Section 42.64 - Objection; motion to exclude
37 C.F.R. § 42.64 Cited 4 times 24 Legal Analyses(a)Deposition evidence. An objection to the admissibility of deposition evidence must be made during the deposition. Evidence to cure the objection must be provided during the deposition, unless the parties to the deposition stipulate otherwise on the deposition record. (b)Other evidence. For evidence other than deposition evidence: (1)Objection. Any objection to evidence submitted during a preliminary proceeding must be filed within ten business days of the institution of the trial. Once a trial
Section 90.2 - Notice; service
37 C.F.R. § 90.2 2 Legal Analyses(a)For an appeal under 35 U.S.C. 141 . (1) (i) In all appeals, the notice of appeal required by 35 U.S.C. 142 must be filed with the Director by electronic mail to the email address indicated on the United States Patent and Trademark Office's web page for the Office of the General Counsel. This electronically submitted notice will be accorded a receipt date, which is the date in Eastern Time when the correspondence is received in the Office, regardless of whether that date is a Saturday, Sunday,