Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=2111241
 


 



Tuning the Obviousness Inquiry after KSR


Mark D. Janis


Indiana University Maurer School of Law

2012

Washington Journal of Law, Technology & Arts, Vol. 7, No. 4, p. 335 (2012)
Indiana Legal Studies Research Paper No. 206

Abstract:     
One of the most important and delicate judicial tasks in patent law is to keep the obviousness doctrine in reasonable working order. There are several reasons why the obviousness doctrine has been the subject of frequent judicial tinkering. First, patentability doctrines interact with each other, so doctrinal alterations that seem to be entirely external to the obviousness doctrine frequently have ripple effects on obviousness. The interaction between the utility and obviousness doctrines provides one good example. Second, the obviousness doctrine is internally complex. Cases in the chemical and biotechnology areas over the past several decades have amply illustrated this point. This article examines Chief Judge Rader’s contributions to the task of tuning the obviousness doctrine, with particular attention to cases that have arisen after the Supreme Court’s pronouncements on obviousness in KSR v. Teleflex.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 19

Accepted Paper Series


Download This Paper

Date posted: July 17, 2012 ; Last revised: July 11, 2013

Suggested Citation

Janis, Mark D., Tuning the Obviousness Inquiry after KSR (2012). Washington Journal of Law, Technology & Arts, Vol. 7, No. 4, p. 335 (2012); Indiana Legal Studies Research Paper No. 206. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2111241

Contact Information

Mark David Janis (Contact Author)
Indiana University Maurer School of Law ( email )
211 S. Indiana Avenue
Bloomington, IN 47405
United States
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 224
Downloads: 46

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo7 in 0.234 seconds