By Andrew Williams — Last year, the Federal Circuit decided the Aqua Products, Inc. v. Matal case en banc in what could be considered the epitome of a fractured decision. After 148 pages and five separate opinions, the only agreed-to result could be summed up in two conclusions: (1) that the PTO had not adopted a rule regarding the burden of persuasion, and that (2) because there was nothing that was entitled to deference, "the PTO may not place that burden on the patentee." Nevertheless, Judge Rayne's concurrence-in-part, at Part III, articulated a rule regarding the burden of production, even…Original Article
You may also like
New alloys for manufacturing freeze-dryers
Navigating the Complexities of Emerging Therapy...
INTERPHEX 2025: Preventing Spills in the Manufacturing...
Agentic AI Growth Predicted, but More Than Half of...
Microsoft and SkyCell Collaborate on Pharma Supply...
Siemens Acquires Dotmatics, Extending AI Software...
About the author
David Miller
a pharmacist, a tech enthusiastic, who explored the Internet to gather all latest information pharma, biotech, healthcare and other related industries.