If you are interested in KSR issues, you will probably find the oral argument from In re Kite and Hatton, 2009-1579 (Fed. Cir. June 21, 2010) interesting. The appeal from the BPAI dealt with a patent claim directed at a method of killing bacteria on catheters. The applicants had discovered a way of killing all of the bacteria on the catheter as opposed to the prior art that just killed most of the bacteria. Since bacteria reproduces rapidly, this was a significant development. The panel was confronted with the issue of whether this was just a new use of a known product (killing all of the bacteria as opposed to some). My pro-applicant bias might be showing here; but, if it were obvious to kill all bacteria on a catheter using this method why wouldn’t others have adopted it long ago? Perhaps it was because some of the prior art relied on was directed at the water treatment and oil field water flooding fields rather than the catheter field . . . .
You can listen to the entire oral argument here: [Listen].
You can read the court’s Rule 36 opinion here: [Read].