Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Patent Law Blogs -> IPBiz
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Patent Law
: IPBizBIO brief in Kubin appeal
By Lawrence B. Ebert, Esq.
See also:
Eleven easy pieces for obviousness under 103? which includes
The Kubin decision had text about the CAFC decision In re Deuel:
Appellants heavily rely on Deuel. (See, e.g., Br. 19.) To the extent
Deuel is considered relevant to this case, we note the Supreme Court
recently cast doubt on the viability of Deuel to the extent the Federal Circuit
rejected an ?obvious to try? test. See KSR Int?l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 127
S.Ct. 1727, ___, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1394, 1396 (2007) (citing Deuel, 51 F.3d
at 1559). Under KSR, it?s now apparent ?obvious to try? may be an
appropriate test in more situations than we previously contemplated.
See also:
http://ipbiz.blogspot.com/2007/05/drug-problems.html
Full post as published by IPBiz on June 12, 2008 (boomark / email).
Philip Morris
Loses Appeal, Will Pay Millions
Asbestos Mesothelioma Victim Wins Appeal of $20 Million Asbestos Cancer Verdict
Asbestos Mesothelioma Victim Wins Appeal of $20 Million Asbestos Cancer Verdict

Obvious to Try BIO Challenges Ex Parte Kubin
Briefs for In re Kubin filed by Amgen and BIO
CA1: appeal waivers and synthetic marijuana
COA Dismisses Appeal For Rule Violations







