Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Patent Law Blogs -> Patent Docs
OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Patent Law
: Patent DocsIn re Kubin: The Obviousness of DNA
By Donald Zuhn, Kevin Noonan, Chris Singer, Sherri Oslick, and Jason Derry
ADVERTISEMENTS
By Kevin E. Noonan --The Federal Circuit heard oral argument for In re Kubin last week, and a very hot bench (Judge Rader presiding, joined by Judges Linn and Friedman) sharply challenged the positions of both Kubin and the Patent Office. While it is foolish to attempt to read the tea leaves of judicial intention when listening to oral argument, the questions from the bench point out once again that obviousness remains a legal issue intimately dependent on the underlying facts (and misapprehension of those facts).Judge Rader immediately raised the "obvious to try" issue with Barbara Rudolph, representing Kubin. After...Full post as published by Patent Docs on January 15, 2009 (boomark / email).
Related Searches
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.

Federal Circuit hears arguments in In re Kubin; what will be obvious in biotechnology
Obvious to Try BIO Challenges Ex Parte Kubin
Patent Docs post on Kubin, for which oral argument is Jan. 8
Obviousness in View of KSR According to USPTO
Apotex v. Sanofi: SCC Softens Canadian Obviousness Test







