United States: At The Federal Circuit

Secondary Considerations: Of Primary Importance in Defending Against an Obviousness Challenge

To determine whether a claim is obvious, the decision-maker must:

  1. determine the scope and content of the prior art;
  2. determine the differences between the prior art and the claim at issue;
  3. assess the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art; and
  4. evaluate evidence of "secondary considerations" (also known as "objective indicia of nonobvousness"). 

See Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 17 (1966). 

A patentee or applicant may rely upon several types of secondary considerations, including teaching away, unexpected results, solving a long-felt but unmet need, acclaim or praise of the claimed invention by others in the field, copying of the claimed features by competitors in the field, and commercial success.  For evidence of secondary considerations to be given weight, there must be a nexus between the evidence and the merits of the claimed invention.  See, e.g., Ashland Oil, Inc. v. Delta Resins & Refractories, Inc., 776 F.2d 281, 306 n.42 (Fed. Cir. 1985).  But secondary considerations, such as unexpected results, do not need to be mentioned in the patent disclosure or recited in the claims.1

In spite of its name and its place as the last of the four Graham factors, "secondary" considerations of nonobviousness can be of primary importance in demonstrating the patentability of a claim.  Such evidence "can establish that 'an invention appearing to have been obvious in light of the prior art was not'" and "may be 'the most probative and cogent evidence in the record.'"  Rambus Inc. v. Rea, 731 F.3d 1248, 1256 (Fed. Cir. 2013) (citations omitted).  The Federal Circuit has emphasized that this evidence guards against the use of hindsight because "[i]t helps 'turn back the clock and place the claims in the context that led to their invention.'"  Id. (citations omitted).  As the Federal Circuit explained in three cases from August and September 2013, the USPTO and other tribunals cannot ignore evidence of secondary considerations offered by a patentee or applicant. 

Apple Inc. v. International Trade Commission, 725 F.3d 1356 (Fed. Cir. 2013), for example, concerned a patent claim covering Apple's transparent, multitouch screen used in the iPhone® and other devices.  The claimed screen is both transparent and able to detect and respond to multiple, simultaneous touches of a user's fingers, unlike prior art screens that were either transparent but not multitouch or multitouch but not transparent.  Id. at 1364-65.  The International Trade Commission (ITC) found Apple's claimed transparent, multitouch screen to be an obvious combination of the multitouch and transparency features described in two items of prior art.  See id.  Apple had offered several types of secondary consideration evidence to support the patentability of its invention, namely, praise from the industry, including news articles describing the claimed screen as "brilliant" and "the most impressive feature of the new iPhone"; evidence that nearly every competitor copied the screen shortly after Apple introduced it; and evidence of commercial success of iPhones including the inventive screen.  Id. at 1366 (citations omitted).  But the ITC did not consider this evidence.  Id.  The Federal Circuit criticized the ITC for not mentioning, let alone weighing, this secondary consideration evidence, and stated that, by failing to consider the evidence, the ITC did not follow precedent and made an error that was "not harmless."  Id. at 1365-66.  The court reiterated that secondary consideration evidence, in fact, "may be 'the most probative and cogent evidence [of patentability] in the record,'" and found that "Apple presented compelling secondary considerations evidence that may have rebutted even a strong showing under the first three Graham factors, and the ITC failed to grapple with it."  Id. at 1366 (alteration in original) (citation omitted).  As a result, the Federal Circuit vacated the ITC's decision and remanded for further consideration.  Id. at 1367.  Judge Reyna, in dissent, argued that the secondary consideration evidence was so strong that the court need not even send the case back to the ITC for further proceedings.  Id. at 1375 (Reyna, J., dissenting).

Rambus v. Rea stemmed from a reexamination proceeding at the USPTO on a patent held by Rambus concerning dynamic random-access memory (DRAM) technology.  Like Apple, Rambus submitted evidence of several types of secondary considerations to the USPTO, including satisfaction of a long-felt but unmet need, industry praise, and commercial success.  The Federal Circuit held that the USPTO had not properly considered this evidence in concluding that the claims were obvious.  For example, the court found that the USPTO did not address evidence of industry praise, including a press release by a competitor calling Rambus's invention "revolutionary and pioneering technology."  Rambus 731 F.3d at 1256-57 (citation omitted).  The court also found that the USPTO erred in concluding there was a lack of nexus between the evidence and the claimed invention, applying too strict a standard in judging nexus.  Id.  The court pointed out that "[o]bjective evidence of non-obviousness need only be 'reasonably commensurate with the scope of the claims.'"  Id. (emphasis added) (citation omitted).  Accordingly, as in Apple, the court vacated the USPTO decision and remanded for reconsideration.

The final case in this trio, Leo Pharm. Prods., Ltd. v. Rea, 726 F.3d 1346 (Fed. Cir. 2013), also an appeal from a USPTO reexamination, emphasizes that secondary consideration evidence can be crucial in defending claimed inventions that, on their face, appear to encompass only small changes from the prior art or appear to be simple combinations of known elements.  That case concerned a pharmaceutical formulation that appeared to be a simple mixture of three ingredients—two active agents and a solvent.  The claim also recited the result-oriented limitation that the formulation is "storage stable."  Id. at 1349-50.  The USPTO found the claims invalid over a combination of three references, two reciting prior compositions comprising mixtures of the two active agents, and the third disclosing the claimed solvent.  Id. at 1350-51.  The Federal Circuit reversed, noting that, while formulations containing both active agents had been made previously, Leo Pharmaceuticals had provided evidence to the USPTO that those prior formulations would not have been able to remain stable in storage because the two active ingredients require different and incompatible conditions, and that this storage stability problem was not recognized in the prior art.  Id. at 1354-55.  During proceedings before the USPTO, Leo Pharmaceuticals had also provided evidence of unexpected results, teaching away, and commercial success.  Id. at 1353-54, 1358.  The court agreed with Leo Pharmaceuticals that the three cited references taught away from the claimed invention, and found its evidence of secondary considerations compelling.  Id. at 1355-56.  The court also noted that, while it had been known for a long time that using the two claimed active agents together was beneficial, the evidence suggested that Leo Pharmaceuticals was the first to develop a formulation comprising both active agents that was storage stable.  See generally id. at 1358-59.  The decision pointed out that "[t]he length of the intervening time between the publication dates of the prior art and the claimed invention can also qualify as an objective indicator of nonobviousness," and that the fourteen- to twenty-two-year gap in this case "speaks volumes to the nonobviousness of the . . . patent."  Id. at 1359.

These three cases highlight that bodies such as the USPTO and ITC are required to consider and weigh evidence of secondary considerations when presented by an applicant or patentee, and that such evidence can in some cases be the best evidence of patentability.  Accordingly, patent applicants, for example, should ensure that the examiner has properly considered secondary consideration evidence, and should consider bringing these cases to the examiner's attention, if not.  Applicants or patent holders defending claims that, on their face, may appear to be noninventive should be prepared to provide secondary consideration evidence to the USPTO or other tribunal as, in such cases, it might well be the best evidence to support patentability.

Footnote

1 Although reciting unexpected results expressly in the claims can be helpful in withstanding a validity challenge, as noted in another article in this issue of Full DisclosureSee also Galderma Labs., L.P. v. Tolmar, Inc., 737 F.3d 731 (Fed. Cir. 2013).

This article previously appeared in Full Disclosure Patent Prosecution Update, January 2014.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
Events from this Firm
21 Nov 2018, Workshop, London, UK

Finnegan partner Leythem Wall will consider European claim drafting strategy and lead the Chemical Workshop during a two-day course, hosted by Management Forum.

27 Nov 2018, Webinar, Washington, DC, United States

As part of Strafford Publications’ webinar series, Finnegan partners Mark Feldstein, Anthony Gutowski, and Tom Irving will discuss the impact of case law on daily U.S. patent practice.

28 Nov 2018, Webinar, Washington, DC, United States

This latest series of webinars will explore emerging trends in the changing intellectual property (IP) legal environment in Europe and the United States.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
 
In association with
Related Topics
 
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
 
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions