Enabling Obviousness – Lessons from Raytheon Versus General Electric

By Eviatar Aron, US and Israel Patent Attorney

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently issued a decision in an ongoing dispute between Raytheon and General Electric (GE) (Raytheon Technologies Corporation v. General Electric Company, CAFC April 16, 2021) which addressed this question.

That decision shed light on a number of key matters, including:

Is there a different enablement standard for reliance on a single prior art reference for an obviousness rejection as opposed to plural references,  and if so, what is that standard?

 To what extent can a claim be broken down to the sum of its parts in the light of an obviousness rejection? 

What is the admissibility of simulations when considering the enablement of cited prior art? 

For a full account of the Court’s findings, and answers to the above questions, click here.

Listen to the latest episode with Alon Ben-Noon the CEO and co-founder of NeuroSense Therapeutics, a clinical stage drug development company offering ground-breaking treatment for ALS patients, as well as other neurodegenerative diseases.

Avraham Hermon sat down with Alon in the NeuroSense offices in Herzliya. They discussed the inspiration for creating a new ALS treatment, how to create results using a small team, raising money, dealing with investors, the mentality of a startup founder, the role of patents in biotech companies and much more.

THE ISRAEL TRADEMARK SYSTEM
Enforcement and Remedies for Trademark Infringement

A Question & Answer series dealing with legal questions about the Israel Trademark System, rights and obligations, and practicalities.

Series Editor: Aaron Lewin, Israel Attorney at Law, Head of Trademarks at JMB Davis Ben-David

Contributors: Ms. Miriam Samis, Ms. Godiva Grant, Mr. Eviatar Aron and Ms. Daphne Lazar

This month, we take a look at enforcement and remedies under Israeli Trademark Law, and answer the following questions:

1. What remedies are available against trademark infringement? 
   
2. What remedies are available against trademark dilution?
   
3. Does the law recognize remedies against other harms to trademark rights besides infringement and dilution?
   
4. What is the procedure for pursuing claims for trademark infringement?
   
5. What typical defences are available to a defendant in trademark litigation?
   
6. What is the procedure for appealing a decision in trademark litigation?

Do you have any questions? Feel free to email any of the above-listed contributors.

COVID Fast-Track Appeals Pilot Program

By Chaim Levitz

For those who have received an adverse response from an examiner at the USPTO for a COVID-19-related patent or design application and want to appeal the rejection with the USPTO, below is your guide to the new COVID Fast-Track Appeals Pilot Program.

On May 7, 2020, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) implemented a fast-track examination process for US patent applications that pertain to COVID-19. The main goal of the fast-track examination process is to allow the applicant to receive a final granted patent within 12 months. Recently, the USPTO created a pilot program for applicants to fast-track an appeal of a rejection for those same applications.

This pilot program affords the ability for appellants to receive a decision on their appeal by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) within six months of acceptance into the pilot program.

In order to apply for this program, the application must satisfy the following requirements: