On August 7, 2020, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board issued a decision in Ex parte Koseoglu (Appeal 2019-002720) and reversed an obviousness rejection of a catalyst composition. Implicit in the Board’s decision was the determination that one of the catalyst components, having only an upper limit on its amount, was present in the catalyst composition.
On July 16, 2020, the Federal Circuit issued a decision in Akeva L.L.C. v. Nike, Inc., Addidas America, Inc. (nonprecedential) in which the difference between removing a subject matter disclaimer from the specification, as opposed to removing one made in amendments and/or remarks during prosecution, amounted to the difference between winning and losing.
On June 30, 2020, the Federal Circuit issued a decision in Pacific Coast Building v. Certainteed Gypsum, Inc. (nonprecedential) agreeing with the District Court that patentee’s own term “scored flexural strength” was inadequately defined, and therefore indefinite.
On March 20, 2020, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) issued a decision in Ex parte Ferreyro reversing, inter alia, an Examiner’s rejection of a claim directed to a device comprising an injection part “having a chamber loaded with viscous bone cement” over a prior art device containing no viscous bone cement. No. 2018-006313 (P.T.A.B. Mar. 20, 2020) (non-precedential).
