• Home
  • About
    • Client Reviews
    • Patent Samples
    • Accolades
    • About Firm
    • Technologies
    • FAQs
  • Services
    • Patent
      • Utility Patents
      • Design Patents
      • Patent Application
      • Patent Defense
      • Patent Enforcement
      • Working with In-House Attorneys
    • Trademark
      • Trademark Search
      • Trademark Application
      • Trademark Enforcement
      • Trademark Defense
    • Licensing
    • Worldwide IP
    • Risk Management
    • Due Diligence
  • Industries
    • Browse Patent Samples
    • Automotive Patents
    • Construction Patents
    • Consumer Products Patents
    • Electronics Patents
    • Food, Beverage, & Other Culinary Patents
    • Manufacturing Patents
    • Medical Products & Devices Patents
    • Optics Patents
    • Software & App Patents
    • Tools & Equipment Patents
  • Learning Resources
    • First-Time Inventor?
    • Why Patent Your Invention in a Bad Economy?
    • Videos on Patents
    • Search 180+ Articles
      • Patent process
        • Overview of Patent Process
          • Patent process timeline and major milestones
          • Patent Process: Invention to Patent Granted (Simplified)
          • Patent process, overall steps and procedures
        • Overview of the examination process within the USPTO
          • Highs and lows of securing patent protection for your invention
          • What is the Patent Office procedure after filing a patent application?
        • Benefits of a Patent Search
          • What is a patent search and How to do it?
        • Patent attorneys, agents and the USPTO can help with the patent process
        • USPTO Website
      • Invention Agreements
        • What is an NDA and when to use them?
        • How to use a contract to protect your invention?
        • Working with others without losing your IP rights
        • Patent Assignments for Independent Contractors
        • Losing Invention Rights When Hiring or Collaborating with Others
        • Avoid Problems: Get an Invention Assignment Agreement
      • Protect Inventions
        • Misconceptions of Provisional Patent Applications
        • Do you need to get your patent attorney to sign an NDA?
        • Can a confidentiality agreement protect me like a patent application?
        • Four types of intellectual property to protect your idea and how to use them
          • Overview of Patents and Intellectual Property
          • Patent protection benefits and why every inventor should consider getting one
          • 8 tips to successfully protect your idea
          • Benefits of Patent Protection
          • Best uses for design patents
        • Reasons to only market your invention after securing patent pendency
          • Dangers of 1 yr grace period under first-inventor-to-file system
          • File a patent application before telling others about the invention
        • Risks and benefits of securing software patent protection
          • Strategy to overcome patentable subject matter rejection
        • Pros and cons of filing a continuation-in-part application
          • What is a continuation patent application?
      • How Patent Applications Work: the Basics
        • How to respond to an office action?
        • Request for non-publication of a patent application
        • Anatomy of a Patent Document
        • How to write a broad patent application?
        • Design patents: pros and cons
      • Patent costs
        • How much does it cost to get a utility patent?
        • Provisional Patent Application: Cheap Alternative?
        • Patent Cost Framework and cash flow
        • Provisional patent application: a cheap option?
        • Cheap provisional patent applications
      • Patent infringement
        • Basics of writing a patent claim for a patent application
        • Patent Marking: Everything you wanted to know
        • Avoiding Patent Infringement
        • Can I Copy My Competitor’s Product?
        • Can I Copy My Competitor’s Product? (Design Patent)
      • Worldwide patents
        • Pros and cons of securing worldwide patent protection and their steps
        • Foreign patent filing to secure protection in other countries
      • Responding to Office Actions
        • Overview of Office Actions
      • Trademarks
        • Trademark Registration: common law, state and federal
        • How to obtain a federal trademark registration?
        • How to select a trademark?
          • Protect your idea when pitching to an investor, potential licensee, or buyer
  • Schedule Consultation
  • Contact

Top-Rated Orange County Patent Lawyer | Helping Inventors in Orange County, Los Angeles County & Beyond | OC Patent Lawyer, Irvine CA

Orange County Patent Attorney

(949) 433-0900
You are here: Home / Patent application process / After Filing a Patent Application / KSR distinguished making it harder to reject a claim

KSR distinguished making it harder to reject a claim

August 14, 2014 by James Yang

EvidenceThe KSR decision could have been construed very broadly so as to make all inventions obvious.  In the opinion, the Supreme Court held that rigid rules cannot override common sense when determining obviousness.  In its broadest terms, the examiner could merely state that a modification was obvious based on common sense, and thus deem the claimed invention unpatentable.

In KSR, the invention at issue related to   electronically controlling a brake pedal.  The industry was moving toward electronic controls but had not done so for brakes.  The Court held that it would have been obvious to make the brake system electronic since the industry was moving in that direction.  In particular, the Court held that the references made of record showed that the state of the art was moving toward such electronic systems.  Hence, an electronically controlled brake was deemed obvious.  In contrast, prior to KSR, the Patent Office was required   to provide a teaching, suggestion or motivation (“TSM”) to make a modification in order to reject a claimed invention as being obvious.  This rule oftentimes precluded an obviousness determination because the examiner had to provide evidence of TSM, even when such modification was obvious based on an application of common sense.

The facts of K/S HIMPP v. Hear-Wear Technologies, LLP (Fed. Cir. 2014) were distinguished from the KSR decision, and The Federal Circuit limited applicability of KSR to the obviousness determination.  In HIMPP, the invention was directed to a hearing aid, which had a behind-the-ear audio processing module, an in-the-canal module, and a connector between the modules.  The connector was a multi-pronged connector.  The examiner indicated during prosecution that the multi-pronged connector was “known in the art,” but did not take “official notice” of it.

When the connector is merely described as a multi-pronged connector, under KSR, it may seem that an examiner should be able to establish the existence of a multi-pronged connector without citing to a prior art reference – that would be common sense.  However, the panel here held that the examiner must cite to a prior art reference in order to establish that multi-pronged connectors were known in the art.  It distinguished this case from that of KSR.  “[T]his case involves the lack of evidence of a specific claim limitation, whereas KSR related to the combination of references where the claim limitations were in evidence.”

This case is especially important in the context of an inter partes reexamination proceeding where new cited prior art cannot be introduced during the proceeding.  To initiate the inter partes reexamination proceeding, the requester must supply new prior art references that the requester believes will invalidate the claims of the patent.  After initiation of the proceeding, no new prior art references can be introduced into the proceeding.  As such, if body of cited art does not contain all of the elements of the independent and dependent claims being invalidated, then the common sense approach of KSR cannot be used to supplement the body of prior art to obtain an anticipation or obviousness rejection.

I invite you to contact me with your patent questions at (949) 433-0900. Please feel free to forward this article to your friends. As an Orange County Patent Attorney, I serve Orange County, Irvine, Los Angeles, San Diego and surrounding cities.

 

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn

Author

James Yang is a patent attorney. For more than 16 years, James Yang has been representing clients to secure patent protection for their inventions and register trademarks to protect their brands. If you need help, call him at (949) 433-0900. Read More…

Popular Posts

  • Patent process overview
  • Patent process explained
  • How much does a patent cost?
  • Why patent your invention in a bad economy?

Patent Book

Navigating the Patent System - new book by Orange County patent attorney, James Yang

Navigating the Patent System: Learn the patent process and strategies to protect your invention

Read for Free
Buy at Amazon

RECEIVE PATENT ARTICLES

Stay up to date on major changes and get tips on the patent process.

We respect your privacy.

Popular Posts

Patent process overview
Patent process explained
How much does a patent cost?
Trademark process and costs
Patent process and costs

 

Services

Utility Patents
Design Patents
Patent Prosecution Services
Patent Defense Services
Patent-Law Counsel for In-House Attorneys
Trademark Prosecution Services
See All Services

Industries

Automotive Patents
Consumer Products Patents
Culinary Patents
Manufacturing Patents
Medical Patents
Optics Patents
Software & App Patents
See All Industries

Contact

James Yang
OC Patent Lawyer
2372 Morse Ave., Suite #178
Irvine, CA 92614
Tel: (949) 433-0900

Connect

  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn

Sitemaps

Sitemap: Pages | Sitemap: Posts

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

By accessing this blog, you agree that no attorney-client relationship is formed except by a subsequent written retainer agreement. Also, you agree to not send confidential information unless directed by me to do so. The information posted on this blog is legal information and not legal advice.
Complete Terms of Use
Complete Privacy Policy

ADA Compliance

OC Patent Lawyer aims to ensure that its services are accessible to people with disabilities.
Accessibility Statement

Service Area

From our office in Irvine, California, we serve clients from all areas within Orange County and Los Angeles County, California.

© 2023 · James Yang, Your Entrepreneur and Mid-Size Business Patent Attorney