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 DocsThe Non-obviousness of DNA
By Donald Zuhn, Kevin Noonan, Chris Singer, Sherri Oslick, and Jason Derry
ADVERTISEMENTS
By Kevin E. Noonan -- The recent discussion of the Federal Circuit's decision in the In re Kubin case suggests there may be some misunderstanding of the science behind the legal question of obviousness. Because obviousness is a question of law based heavily on underlying issues of fact, it is important for commentators as well as judges to have some understanding of the underlying science. The Federal Circuit's decision in the Kubin case illustrates the possible consequences of misunderstanding, or of Judge Rich's recitation of the "rudiments" of biotechnology from In re O'Farrell as somehow conferring on appellate judges the...Full post as published by Patent Docs on April 14, 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.

Obviousness in View of KSR According to USPTO
Apotex v. Sanofi: SCC Softens Canadian Obviousness Test
Supreme Court of Canada tightens obviousness standard
Charles Lawson - Quantum of obviousness in Australian patent laws
Ex parte Fu and obviousness rejections over a genus







