Patent case: Fensterrollo, Germany

search-result-placeholder.jpg

The FCJ held that when inventive step is assessed, for each feature of the assessed claim which is not disclosed, i.e. directly and unambiguously derivable, to be considered obvious, an incentive for the skilled person to particularly choose this feature rather than an alternative would need to be proven or at least plausible.

Case date: 05 June 2018

Case number: X ZR 80/16

Court: Federal Court of Justice of Germany

A full summary of this case has been published on Kluwer IP Law.

Comments (0)
Your email address will not be published.
Leave a Comment
Your email address will not be published.
Clear all
Become a contributor!
Interested in contributing? Submit your proposal for a blog post now and become a part of our legal community! Contact Editorial Guidelines
Image
AI Assistant on Kluwer IP Law's Manual IP
Image
Whitepaper

Book Ad List

Books
book1
Vissers Annotated European Patent Convention 2024 Edition
Kaisa Suominen, Nina Ferara, Peter de Lange, Andrew Rudge
€105.00
AIPPI
Experimental Use and Bolar Exemptions
David Gilat, Charles A. Boulakia, Daphné Derouane & Ralph Nack
€190.00
book2
Annotated PCT
Malte Köllner
€160.00