Norman International, Inc. v. Hunter Douglas Inc.

11 Cited authorities

KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc.
550 U.S. 398 (2007) Cited 1,547 times 185 Legal Analyses
Holding that, in an obviousness analysis, "[r]igid preventative rules that deny factfinders recourse to common sense, however, are neither necessary under our case law nor consistent with it"
Unigene Laboratories, Inc. v. Apotex, Inc.
655 F.3d 1352 (Fed. Cir. 2011) Cited 89 times 2 Legal Analyses
Declining to find a claim obvious when the when prior art does not provide "indication of which parameters were critical" or "direction as to which of many possible choices is likely to be successful"
Randall Mfg. v. Rea
733 F.3d 1355 (Fed. Cir. 2013) Cited 83 times 2 Legal Analyses
Reversing finding of non-obviousness where court “narrowly focus[ed] on the four prior-art references” and ignored record evidence of “the knowledge and perspective of one of ordinary skill in the art” to explain motivation to combine or modify references
Otsuka Pharm. Co. v. Sandoz, Inc.
678 F.3d 1280 (Fed. Cir. 2012) Cited 82 times 15 Legal Analyses
Holding that issues raised only in a footnote may be deemed waived
In re Am. Academy of Science Tech Ctr.
367 F.3d 1359 (Fed. Cir. 2004) Cited 88 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that descriptions of deficiencies of using mainframe computers set out in the "Background of the Invention" portion of the specification did not exclude mainframes from the definition of "'user computer'" where the "specification as a whole" did not express a clear disavowal of that subject matter
In re Gordon
733 F.2d 900 (Fed. Cir. 1984) Cited 31 times 2 Legal Analyses
Finding that a modification which renders the invention inoperable for its intended purpose is not obvious because it teaches away from the invention
Section 311 - Inter partes review
35 U.S.C. § 311 Cited 403 times 190 Legal Analyses
Establishing grounds and scope of IPR proceeding
Section 314 - Institution of inter partes review
35 U.S.C. § 314 Cited 375 times 632 Legal Analyses
Directing our attention to the Director's decision whether to institute inter partes review "under this chapter" rather than "under this section"
Section 42.100 - Procedure; pendency
37 C.F.R. § 42.100 Cited 192 times 75 Legal Analyses
Providing that the PTAB gives " claim . . . its broadest reasonable construction in light of the specification of the patent in which it appears"
Section 42.108 - Institution of inter partes review
37 C.F.R. § 42.108 Cited 45 times 69 Legal Analyses
Permitting partial institution
Section 42.104 - Content of petition
37 C.F.R. § 42.104 Cited 28 times 54 Legal Analyses
Describing the content of the petition, including both "the patents or printed publications relied upon for each ground," and "supporting evidence relied upon to support the challenge"

Norman International, Inc. v. Hunter Douglas Inc.

11 Cited authorities

Holding that, in an obviousness analysis, "[r]igid preventative rules that deny factfinders recourse to common sense, however, are neither necessary under our case law nor consistent with it"

Declining to find a claim obvious when the when prior art does not provide "indication of which parameters were critical" or "direction as to which of many possible choices is likely to be successful"

Reversing finding of non-obviousness where court “narrowly focus[ed] on the four prior-art references” and ignored record evidence of “the knowledge and perspective of one of ordinary skill in the art” to explain motivation to combine or modify references

Holding that issues raised only in a footnote may be deemed waived

Finding that a modification which renders the invention inoperable for its intended purpose is not obvious because it teaches away from the invention

Establishing grounds and scope of IPR proceeding

Directing our attention to the Director's decision whether to institute inter partes review "under this chapter" rather than "under this section"

Providing that the PTAB gives " claim . . . its broadest reasonable construction in light of the specification of the patent in which it appears"

Permitting partial institution

Describing the content of the petition, including both "the patents or printed publications relied upon for each ground," and "supporting evidence relied upon to support the challenge"