Wednesday, June 22, 2005

SD Ill reversed by CAFC in Prima Tek v Poly Pap

Note that the first paragraph of the CAFC in the "Discussion" section mentions policy issues and states that our patent system depends primarily on the PTO to screen out invalid patents.

Note that the CAFC cites Texas Digital, 308 F.3d 1193.

On inherent anticipation, the CAFC cites Schering v. Geneva 339 F.3d 1373.

Here, the CAFC finds anticipation based on a reference that was before the PTO during prosecution.


Post a Comment

<< Home