Federal Case Summaries
Clear all
Coverage since November 3, 1994

Federal

Uncategorized

DePuy Spine, Inc. v. Medtronic Sofamor Danek — Obviousness Requires Showing Why a Skilled Artisan Would Have Combined Prior Art References, Not Just That Combination Was Possible

The Federal Circuit reversed a finding of obviousness in a spinal implant patent case, holding that the district court failed to identify a sufficient motivation or reason why a person of ordinary skill would have combined the cited prior art references — possibility of combination is not enough; th

Uncategorized

DyStar Textilfarben GmbH v. C.H. Patrick Co. — TSM Test Is Flexible; Common Knowledge and Common Sense Can Supply Motivation to Combine

The Federal Circuit held a textile dye process patent invalid as obvious, clarifying that the teaching-suggestion-motivation (TSM) test for obviousness is flexible and allows motivation to combine to be found in common knowledge, common sense, and efficiency goals — not just explicit documentary evi

Uncategorized

Ormco Corp. v. Align Technology, Inc. — Orthodontic Aligner Patents Invalid as Obvious; Commercial Success Based on Unclaimed Features Does Not Save Claims

The Federal Circuit invalidated Align Technology’s patents on incremental orthodontic aligners as obvious over prior art, holding that packaging convenience and commercial success driven by aesthetic and unclaimed features cannot overcome a prima facie case of obviousness.

Uncategorized

In re EchoStar Communications Corp. — Asserting Advice-of-Counsel Defense Waives Privilege for All Related Communications, But Not All Work Product

The Federal Circuit held that when a patent defendant asserts an advice-of-counsel defense to willful infringement, it waives attorney-client privilege for all communications about the patent’s validity, enforceability, and infringement — but the waiver does not automatically extend to all att

Uncategorized

Atofina v. Great Lakes Chemical Corp. — Narrower Claimed Range Is Not Anticipated by Broader Prior Art Range Without Specific Disclosure of the Narrower Range

The Federal Circuit reversed a finding of anticipation, holding that a prior art reference disclosing a broad temperature range of 100–500°C did not anticipate a claimed narrower range of 330–450°C — a genus does not anticipate every species, and a broader prior art range anticipates a narrower clai

Scroll to Top