K/S Himpp v. Hear-Wear Technologies, LLC
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
1DissentDyk, Circuit Judge
This should be an easy case, reversing the quite odd decision of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”) that it could not consider whether multipronged electrical connections were well known in the prior art. But the majority does not reverse. It affirms. In my view, this case raises important questions regarding the role of the PTO in making obviousness determinations.
The majority holds that patent examiners, in addressing questions of obviousness, may not rely on their expert knowledge and common sense about what is well known in the art except “in narrow circumstances”…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Graham v. John Deere Co. of Kansas CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Microsoft Corp. v. i4i Ltd. PartnershipSupreme Court of the United States · 2011
- Dickinson v. ZurkoSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
- American Hoist & Derrick Company, Cross-Appellee v. Sowa & Sons, Inc., Cross-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1984
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.