PTAB Answers Prior Art Questions Raised By Idle Free

Law360, New York (August 12, 2015, 10:28 AM EDT) -- More than two years ago, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board set forth the ground rules for filing a motion to amend in Idle Free Systems Inc. v. Bergstrom Inc.[1] The ground rules clearly placed the burden on the patent owner to show patentable distinction over the prior art of record and also prior art known to the patent owner. The sentence immediately following this directive stated that "[s]ome representation should be made about the specific technical disclosure of the closest prior art known to the patent owner, and not just a conclusory remark that no prior art known to the patent owner renders obvious the proposed substitute claims" (emphasis added)....

Law360 is on it, so you are, too.

A Law360 subscription puts you at the center of fast-moving legal issues, trends and developments so you can act with speed and confidence. Over 200 articles are published daily across more than 60 topics, industries, practice areas and jurisdictions.

A Law360 subscription includes features such as