Prior Art Must Be Publicly Accessible, Not Actually Accessed
Contributed by Knobbe Martens. Originally published on Patexia; republished here as part of the LexDana archive.
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. v. INFOBRIDGE PTE. LTD.
Before Newman, Schall, and O’Malley. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Summary: A reference must be publicly accessible, not actually accessed, before the critical date to qualify as prior art.
Samsung requested Inter Partes Review of a patent owned by Infobridge. Samsung argued the claims were anticipated by a draft video coding standard. Samsung argued the draft was prior art because the author had emailed it to others working on the standard and a listserv of any “interested individual” who requested to be on the distribution list. The PTAB held the draft was not prior art because the email was a “limited distribution” that did not show the reference was “generally disseminated to persons interested and ordinarily skilled in the art.” Thus, the PTAB upheld all challenged claims.
The Federal Circuit held the PTAB erred by confusing access with accessibility. The Board should have considered whether Samsung’s evidence established that an ordinarily skilled artisan could have accessed the draft (e.g., by joining the listserv) instead of requiring Samsung to prove that ordinarily skilled artisans actually received the email. Accordingly, the Federal Circuit vacated and remanded for further factual findings.
Editor: Paul Stewart
Written by: Samuel I. Cockriel & Adam Powell
More insights
Federal Circuit Affirms Invalidation of Patent for Lack of Enablement of Claims Directed to a Method of Treating a Patient with a Unit Dosage in Wyeth Llc v Astrazeneca Pharmaceuticals Lp
Written by : Eric Furman, Ph.D. and Ashley C. Morales Key Takeaway: Federal Circuit invalidates patent claims directed to a method for treating non-small cell lung cancer through administration of “a unit dosage” of an irreversible epidermal…
When About Becomes Indefinite Federal Circuit Provides Guidance for Life Science Patent Applications Regarding Limits of Approximation in Enviro Tech v Safe Foods
Written by : Jason J. Jardine and Kenneth O. Aruda, Ph.D. Key Takeaway: The term “about” remains useful in biotech and pharmaceutical claims, but only if the patent provides objective guidance about what the term means. Absent that guidance,…
When Any Patent Means No Patent Federal Circuit Reverses Non Specific Verdict
Written by : Brian C. Barnes and Sophia F. Zahn OLLNOVA TECHNOLOGIES LTD. v. ECOBEE TECHNOLOGIES ULC [OPINION] Before Chen , Cunningham, and Stark. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. Summary : A verdict form…