« Separation of Powers | Main | Litigation Limelight »

July 10, 2013

Blind Pig & The Acorn

The CAFC concocted the "substantial evidence" standard so as to ignore appeals from PTO Board rejections. Rare is the instance when the appeals court will exercise otherwise. But in Smith & Nephew v. Synthes (CAFC 2012-1343), as part of the CAFC's proclaimed war on patents, a panel took the opportunity to invalid a patent, via excruciatingly detailed analysis, that the Board had wondrously found non-obvious. The claimed invention was clearly an incremental improvement at best. And it looks like the PTO Board was simply asleep at the switch on this one.

Posted by Patent Hawk at July 10, 2013 10:47 PM | Prior Art