Public
- Public
- Network
- Groups
- Featured
- Popular
- People

"More specifically, the incongruity creates a situation where, for example, Design 1 does not infringe a patent claiming Design 2, but that same Design 2 could (if earlier in time) render Design 1 as obvious, even though Design 1 does not fall within the scope of the patent on Design 2. See Mueller & Brean, supra, at 547 (explaining in further detail this incongruity)."

Download link

"More specifically, the incongruity creates a situation where, for example, Design 1 does not infringe a patent claiming Design 2, but that same Design 2 could (if earlier in time) render Design 1 as obvious, even though Design 1 does not fall within the scope of the patent on Design 2. See Mueller & Brean, supra, at 547 (explaining in further detail this incongruity)."
https://files.mastodon.social/media_attachments/files/111/002/788/408/383/887/original/016378305c4c0e9b.jpg

Notices where this attachment appears

Embed this notice
Sarah (Fackrell) Burstein (design_law@mastodon.social)'s status on Monday, 04-Sep-2023 04:27:10 JST Sarah (Fackrell) Burstein
in reply to

No, this is not some kind of inappropriate incongruity.
This is the difference between anticipation and obviousness.

In conversation Monday, 04-Sep-2023 04:27:10 JST from mastodon.social permalink