Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 31 DECEMBER 2013

Old Compound + Known Purpose + Prior Art Concentrations = Obvious

In a split panel decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a district court concluding that the claims at issue were invalid as obvious because they were directed to the use of an old compound for a known purpose in a concentration that falls squarely within a range disclosed in the prior art as preferred for that purpose.

United StatesIntellectual Property

Galderma Labs L.P., et al v. Tolmar, Inc.

In a split panel decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a district court concluding that the claims at issue were invalid as obvious because they were directed to the use of an old compound for a known purpose in a concentration that falls squarely within a range disclosed in the prior art as preferred for that purpose.  The Federal Circuit also concluded that objective considerations of non-obviousness, including teaching away, unexpected results and commercial success, did not overcome the clear and convincing evidence of obviousness based on the prior art.  Galderma Labs L.P., et al v. Tolmar, Inc., Case No. 2013-1034 (Fed. Cir., Dec. 11, 2013) (Prost, J.) (Newman, J., dissenting).

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from