§

Ex parte Morse et al.

29042395 (B.P.A.I. Sep. 17, 1998)
Ex parte Morse et al.

3 Cited authorities

  1. Durling v. Spectrum Furniture Company, Inc.

    101 F.3d 100 (Fed. Cir. 1996)   Cited 95 times   27 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a district court's vague description of the concept of a design patent provided insufficient detail for the appellate court to "discern the internal reasoning employed by the trial court to reach its decision"

  2. In re Harvey

    12 F.3d 1061 (Fed. Cir. 1993)   Cited 30 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Reversing a finding of obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103 because it "should have focused on actual appearances, rather than `design concepts'"

  3. Section 103 - Conditions for patentability; non-obvious subject matter

    35 U.S.C. § 103   Cited 6,130 times   479 Legal Analyses
    Holding the party seeking invalidity must prove "the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains."