• DocumentCode
    1095785
  • Title

    Patents [obvious to whom?]

  • Author

    Klee, M.M.

  • Volume
    27
  • Issue
    2
  • fYear
    2008
  • Firstpage
    102
  • Lastpage
    102
  • Abstract
    One of the basic tenets of patent law is that an inventor is not entitled to a patent on an invention that would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art. But who is that person? That was the question before the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) in the recent case of Daiichi Pharmaceuticals. The case shows that the inquiry on who is the person of ordinary skill in the art does not necessarily stop with the claims of the patent in suit. Daiichi´s claims were directed to first- line physicians, but in finding a way to help such physicians, it had relied on scientists with very different skills. Having named those scientists as its inventors, the CAFC had no trouble in deciding that they were the actual audience for Daiichi´s patent and were the persons of ordinary skill in the art.
  • Keywords
    drugs; ear; patents; patient treatment; pharmaceutical industry; CAFC; Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit; Daiichi Pharmaceuticals; antibiotic treatment; ear; ordinary skill person; patent law; Antibiotics; Art; Circuits; Deafness; Drugs; Ear; Medical treatment; Pediatrics; Pharmaceuticals; Trademarks;
  • fLanguage
    English
  • Journal_Title
    Engineering in Medicine and Biology Magazine, IEEE
  • Publisher
    ieee
  • ISSN
    0739-5175
  • Type

    jour

  • DOI
    10.1109/EMB.2008.915493
  • Filename
    4469645