Obviousness Standard for Patents Post-KSR

Strategies to Withstand USPTO Obviousness Rejections and Attacks on Patent Validity

Recording of a 90-minute CLE webinar/teleconference with Q&A


Conducted on Wednesday, April 14, 2010
Recorded event now available


This CLE webinar will review how the obviousness standard has been applied by the court and the USPTO since the Supreme Court's decision in KSR v. Teleflex. The panel will outline best practices for patent counsel to avoid obviousness rejections and defend against attacks on patent validity.

Description

The Supreme Court’s 2007 decision in KSR v. Teleflex established a new standard for obviousness. The Court criticized the Federal Circuit’s teaching-suggestion-motivation (TSM) test and focused on criteria for examining patentability.

The Court changed the framework for evaluating obviousness but left unanswered questions. Much insight can be gained from how the courts and the USPTO Board of Appeals have applied the obviousness standard since KSR.

Companies and counsel must understand how KSR is being applied and the steps to take and to avoid when preparing and prosecuting patents to withstand obviousness rejections and attacks on validity.

Listen as our authoritative panel of patent attorneys examines the obviousness standard, how the courts and the USPTO have applied KSR, outlines steps that companies and counsel should take to withstand obviousness rejections, and offers best practices for defending against obviousness attacks in litigation.

Outline

  1. Obviousness standard
    1. KSR v. Teleflex
    2. Application of Graham v. John Deere factors
    3. USPTO examiner guidelines
  2. Treatment post-KSR
    1. In the courts
    2. In the USPTO
  3. Patent prosecution post-KSR
    1. Responding to rejections
    2. Responding to attacks on validity

Benefits

The panel will review these and other key questions:

  • How have the Graham v. John Deere factors been applied following the KSR decision?
  • Under what circumstances has the obvious-to-try standard work supported a finding of obviousness—and when has it worked to nullify such a finding?
  • What are the steps that patent applicants can take to stand up to obviousness rejections?

Faculty

Ronald E. Cahill, Partner
Nutter McClennen & Fish, Boston

He manages the firm's Intellectual Property Group. He concentrates his practice in patent portfolio development, patent litigation, and related counseling. He also takes lead roles in patent infringement and patent validity opinions, re-examination and re-issue proceedings, patent interferences, corporate IP due diligence undertakings, and advising clients in foreign patent opposition proceedings.

Karen Canaan, Attorney
CanaanLaw, Menlo Park, Calif.

She prepares and prosecutes patent applications for clients in the biotechnology, chemical, pharmaceutical, and medical arts industries. She advises on strategies for developing international patent portfolios, counsels on third party patent positions, and assists in obtaining licensing agreements. has experience preparing patent legal opinions, including invalidity and non-infringement opinions.

Kevin J. Meek, Partner
Baker Botts, Austin, Texas

He has broad experience in patent litigation, prosecution and licensing and trademark and copyright prosecution and enforcement. He handles a variety of corporate transactions centering on technology transfers and intellectual property rights. He prepares and prosecutes patent applications covering a broad. He is the firm wide deputy department head for the firm's intellectual property department.

Ordering

Online CLE - Audio Recording

Includes audio streaming of full program plus handouts (available 24 hours after live seminar).

CLE: Pre-approved for participatory or non-traditional/alternate format credit in: CA, HI*, NY*, WV*. Pre-approved for self-study credit in: AK, AZ, GA, MO, MT, OR*, TX, UT, VT, WA.
Upon request, also available in: CO, CT*, FL, ID, KY, LA*, ME, NC, ND, NE, NH, NM, NV, SC, TN, WI*, WY. If you are applying for credit in one of these states, make sure to select those states when placing your order.
(*Indicates that Strafford must report attendance.)

Online CLE Audio $297.00
Available 24 hours after the live event

How does this work?


Recorded Event

Includes full event recording plus handouts (available after live seminar).

CLE: Pre-approved for self-study credit in: AK, AZ, CA, CT, GA, HI, MO, MT, NY, OR, TX, UT, VT, WA, WV. Upon request, self-study credit is also available in: CO, FL, ID, KY, ME, ND, NE, NH, NM, NV, WI, WY. If you are applying for self-study credit in one of these states, contact Strafford CLE at 1-800-926-7926 ext. 35 or CLE@straffordpub.com.

Webinar Download (Slide Presentation with Audio) $297.00
Available three business days after the live event

How does this work?

DVD (Slide Presentation with Audio) $297.00 plus $9.45 S&H
Available ten business days after the live event

MP3 Download (Audio with Slide PDFs) $297.00
Available 24 hours after the live event

How does this work?

CD (Audio with Slide PDFs) $297.00 plus $9.45 S&H
Available ten business days after the live event

Webinar/Teleconference

Strafford webinars/teleconferences offer several options for participation: online viewing of speaker-controlled PowerPoint presentations with audio via computer speakers or via phone; or audio only via telephone (download speaker handouts prior to the program).  Please note that our webinars do not feature videos of the presenters.

Program Materials

Requires Adobe Reader 8 or later. Download Acrobat FREE.

Program Materials

Requires Adobe Reader 8 or later. Download Acrobat FREE.

Can't Attend the Live Program?

CLE Credit

Strafford's live seminars qualify for CLE in every state that accredits webinars. They offer you a high quality, cost effective, and convenient CLE option, with no lost travel time or expenses.

More Details >

Customer Reviews

Very well-organized.

Kerin Coughlin

Constantine Cannon

Content was excellent.

Jonelle Burnham

Kimberly-Clark

Speakers were knowledgeable enough to talk about the subject matter in an easily digestible manner.

Daniel M. Cleary

Gotham Insurance/New York Marine & General Insurance

Cutting edge information from people who are in the field.

John McGowan

Donahue Tucker & Ciandella

The speakers were knowledgeable and presented useful information.

Karen Shaffer-Levy

Reed Elsevier

Intellectual Property Law Advisory Board

Stephen R. Baird

Shareholder

Winthrop & Weinstine

Charles S. Baker

Partner

Fulbright & Jaworski

David S. Bloch

Partner

Winston & Strawn

Hung H. Bui

Partner

Antonelli Terry Stout & Kraus

Irah H. Donner

Partner

Stroock & Stroock & Lavan

Ian N. Feinberg

Partner

Mayer Brown

Anthony J. Fitzpatrick

Partner

Duane Morris

Craig P. Opperman

Partner

Reed Smith

David Segal

Partner

Gibson Dunn & Crutcher

Jeffrey R. Seul

Partner

Holland + Knight

Astrid R. Spain

Partner

McDermott Will & Emery

Mark P. Wine

Partner

Orrick

Our Guarantee

Strafford webinars and teleconferences are backed by our 100% Unconditional Money-Back Guarantee: if you are not satisfied with any of our products, simply let us know and get a full refund. For more information regarding complaints and refunds, please contact us at 1-800-926-7926 ext 10.