Fed. Circ. Leaves Room For Nonexpert Obviousness Opinions

Law360 (March 5, 2020, 2:24 PM EST) -- A perennial problem in patent trial practice is the extent to which a party's lay witnesses may approach issues of obviousness in their testimony. Is obviousness the exclusive bailiwick of the retained independent expert?

Should an attorney consider abbreviated expert disclosures for a client's employees or third-party witnesses who may be able to provide some testimonial insights into the obviousness question?

Much ado has been made recently about HVLPO2 LLC v. Oxygen Frog LLC[1], in which the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held certain lay opinion testimony on obviousness inadmissible.[2] An examination of the decision suggests that there...

Stay ahead of the curve

In the legal profession, information is the key to success. You have to know what’s happening with clients, competitors, practice areas, and industries. Law360 provides the intelligence you need to remain an expert and beat the competition.


  • Access to case data within articles (numbers, filings, courts, nature of suit, and more.)
  • Access to attached documents such as briefs, petitions, complaints, decisions, motions, etc.
  • Create custom alerts for specific article and case topics and so much more!

TRY LAW360 FREE FOR SEVEN DAYS

Attached Documents

Related Sections

Law Firms

Companies

Government Agencies

Hello! I'm Law360's automated support bot.

How can I help you today?

For example, you can type:
  • I forgot my password
  • I took a free trial but didn't get a verification email
  • How do I sign up for a newsletter?
Beta
Ask a question!