Judge Newman calls a six reference obviousness combination “striking”

I think most patent prosecutors would be surprised to discover that Judge Newman authored the court’s opinion in In re Gorman, 933 F.2d 982, 18 U.S.P.Q.2d 1885 (Fed. Cir. 1991) which approved of a rejection of a design patent claim by combining 13 references.

Rather, I think most patent prosecutors would expect to hear her say what she said during the oral argument of CPI CARD GROUP-MINNESOTA, INC. v. MULTI PPACKAGING SOLUTIONS, INC., No. 2019-1616 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 16, 2020):

I have updated an earlier post where I am collecting comments by the Federal Circuit judges about rejections/arguments that rely on a large number of references for obviousness. Use this link to access that post: [Too Many References?].

Comments are closed.