Patent Law | Expert Legal Commentary
April 2, 2009
Boston Scientific v. Cordis: Obviousness from Two Separate Embodiments
Boston Scientific Scimed v. Cordis Corp.
By
Olivier A. Taillieu of Zuber & Taillieu and Spyros J. Lazaris
In Boston Scientific v. Cordis, 554 F.3d 982 (Fed. Cir. 2009), the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit overturned both the PTO Examiner and the district court trial jury in invalidating Boston Scientific’s patent claims due to invalidity. Specifically, the appellate court determined that prior art disclosed all elements of Boston Scientific’s claims, albeit across two embodiments. In reaching the opinion the court ignored the longstanding Graham v. John Deere obvious analysis and used language more akin to that found in KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 127 S. Ct. 1740 (2007), perhaps helping to clarify the court’s approach post-KSR.
To continue reading this article, subscribe now
It's FREE and only takes seconds
About the Author
Olivier A. Taillieu is a Partner of Zuber & Taillieu, focusing on intellectual property litigation and arbitration.
Image Credit: Boston Scientific v. Cordis Corp./No. 2008-1073, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, 01/15/2009
