Invalidating a patent single parent dating paia hawaii
We couldn’t identify any result where this feature was present along with the other limiting features. Moreover, the description revealed unsupported” could very well fit in.
Thus, we put this forward for a discussion with our client.
On appeal, the Federal Circuit reviews the Board’s factual findings for substantial evidence – a liberal and forgiving standard that only requires “such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.” Conclusions of law, however, are reviewed .
Perhaps of most relevance for many obviousness cases – the existence of a motivation-to-combine references is deemed a question of fact and thus deference is given to the PTO’s conclusion.
In fact, an experienced person would relate to this when I say: In many cases, we do not have bang-on results.
So, one needs to know the ‘unconventional’ ways that one can take to get to those results.
Later on, the client told us that the same prior-art reference was used in the court, and the patent get invalidated with this interpretation.In one of the cases, we received many references from our client as already-known references.