About the Authors

  • The Authors and Contributors of "Patent Docs" are patent attorneys and agents, many of whom hold doctorates in a diverse array of disciplines.
2018 Juristant Badge - MBHB_165
Juristat #4 Overall Rank

E-mail Newsletter

  • Enter your e-mail address below to receive the "Patent Docs" e-mail newsletter.

Contact the Docs

Docs on Twitter


Disclaimer

  • "Patent Docs" does not contain any legal advice whatsoever. This weblog is for informational purposes only, and its publication does not create an attorney-client relationship. In addition, nothing on "Patent Docs" constitutes a solicitation for business. This weblog is intended primarily for other attorneys. Moreover, "Patent Docs" is the personal weblog of the Authors; it is not edited by the Authors' employers or clients and, as such, no part of this weblog may be so attributed. All posts on "Patent Docs" should be double-checked for their accuracy and current applicability.
Juristat_165
Juristat #8 Overall Rank

Pharma-50-transparent_216px_red

« Conference & CLE Calendar | Main | ToolGen Files Opposition to CVC Substantive Preliminary Motion No. 3 to Add Claims in ToolGen Patent »

August 29, 2021

Comments

Michael, as you observe, commercial success (CS), as an indication of non-obviousness, is "notoriously difficult" to adjudicate. My suspicion is that judges and juries, out of their depth when it comes to assessing obviousness, are much more comfortable interrogating CS. This allows them to use CS as smoke and mirrors, to get to the obviousness result that accords with their gut feeling. I think it is a pity that the C of A passes the parcel back to the lower court with an instruction to spend yet more time interrogating the CS issue. As if the obviousness issue weren't difficult enough already to adjudicate.

Lord Mansfield, the father of commercial law in England, in 1769 had something intelligent to say, namely: in all mercantile transactions, the great object should be certainty and, therefore, it is of more consequencethat a rule should be certain than whether the rule is established one way or another.

The EPO and the courts in Europe, in addressing the obviousness issue, don't permit themselves to be swallowed up in endless debate about CS, how much, how relevant, how persuasive it is.

The view as to certainty (for commercial law) very much has its mirror in patent law - and that mirror has been shattered by our Supreme Court.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

September 2021

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30