cyckV4

TABLE OF CONTENTS vii
In re Fisher, 421 F.3d 1365 (Fed. Cir. 2005) ........................................................................ 709
Problem 19-1 ........................................................................................................................ 716
Chapter Twenty
REQUIREMENTS FOR PATENT PROTECTION: NOVELTY .................................. 719
Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 720
1.) Novelty: Basics .............................................................................................................. 721
Gayler v. Wilder, 51 U.S. 477 (1850) ................................................................................... 721
2.) Novelty: Novel to whom? .............................................................................................. 724
3.) Novelty: Anticipation of Every Element ........................................................................ 725
Coffin v. Ogden, 85 U.S. 120 (1873) .................................................................................... 725
Verdegaal Brothers, Inc. v. Union Oil Co. of California,
814 F.2d 628 (Fed. Cir. 1987) ....................................................................................... 727
4.) Novelty: Inherency ........................................................................................................ 730
In re Cruciferous Sprout Litigation, 301 F.3d 1343 (Fed. Cir. 2002) ................................... 730
5.) Statutory Bar: Public Use .............................................................................................. 734
Pennock v. Dialogue, 27 U.S. 1 (1829) ................................................................................ 734
6.) Statutory Bar: The Experimental Use Exception ........................................................... 739
City of Elizabeth v. Pavement Co., 97 U.S. 126 (1877) ....................................................... 739
Problem 20-1 ........................................................................................................................ 742
Chapter Twenty-One
NON-OBVIOUSNESS ....................................................................................................... 745
Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 745
Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1 (1966) .................................................................... 746
1.) A Four Step Test for Obviousness .................................................................................. 752
Stratoflex, Inc. v. Aeroquip Corp., 713 F.2d 1530 (Fed. Cir. 1983) ...................................... 753
2.) The Scope of Prior Art ................................................................................................... 761
In re Carl D. Clay, 966 F.2d 656 (Fed. Cir. 1992) ............................................................... 761
3.) Burden of Proof and “Obvious to Try” .......................................................................... 764
In re Bell, 991 F.2d 781 (Fed. Cir. 1993) ............................................................................. 764
4.) ‘These Are Not the PHOSITA’s you’ve been looking for. . . .’ ...................................... 767
Kimberly-Clark v. Johnson & Johnson, 745 F.2d 1437 (1984) ............................................ 767
Dan L. Burk and Mark A. Lemley, Is Patent Law Technology-Specific?
17 Berkeley Tech. L.J. 1155 (2002) .............................................................................. 768
Problem 21-1 ........................................................................................................................ 770
Chapter Twenty-Two
A CREATIVE COMMONS? SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION ................................. 773
James Boyle, “A Creative Commons” from The Public Domain ......................................... 776