Patterson v. Avery Dennison Corp., 281 F.3d 676 (CAFC 2000)
Patterson v. Avery Dennison Corp.
Was Patterson's patent invalid due to obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103?
Under 35 U.S.C. § 103, a patent may not be obtained if the invention is obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art.
The court held that Patterson's patent was indeed obvious and therefore invalid, siding with Avery Dennison Corp.
This case reaffirms the rigorous standards involved in proving non-obviousness, emphasizing the importance of demonstrating that an invention offers more than an incrementally improved solution. For law students, it provides a concrete example of how courts scrutinize patent claims, prompting questions about innovative thresholds and the protection of scientific advancements.