Source: https://www.dilworthip.com/resources/blog/dr-jonathan-schuchardt-present-upcoming-strafford-cle-webinar-obviousness/
Timestamp: 2019-04-25 22:50:15+00:00

Document:
Dr. Jonathan Schuchardt, Partner at Dilworth IP will be presenting as a panelist for the upcoming Strafford webinar Obviousness Standard After the AIA: Leveraging Latest PTO and Court Guidance. This webinar can be used to obtain CLE credits through Strafford. The webinar is scheduled for Thursday, January 15th from 1:00pm to 2:30pm EST.
Strafford is extending a 50% discount for all friends and affiliates of Dilworth IP. That discount will be calculated at checkout when registering through Strafford’s website by using the links in this post.
The impact of Federal Circuit decisions from 2013 and 2014 has been significant. Federal Circuit review of PTAB decisions in appeals of final rejections and ex parte and inter partes reexaminations has highlighted the problem of hindsight in Leo Pharmaceuticals, the role of common sense and deference to PTO expertise in K/S HIMPP v. Hear-Wear Technologies and In re Giannelli, and the impact of KSR in evaluating motivation to combine references in Randall Manufacturing.
The Federal Circuit’s treatment of district court decisions will also be explored. The court’s analysis of unexpected results in Galderma Laboratories v. Tolmar and Bristol-Myers Squibb v. Teva Pharmaceuticals has added contours to the obviousness calculus. Among other recent issues, obviousness-type double patenting (e.g., Gilead Sciences v. Natco Pharma) and design patent obviousness (e.g., MRC Innovations v. Hunter Manufacturing) will be discussed.
Decisions have begun to emerge from the PTAB from inter partes review proceedings. We will explore how the PTAB is analyzing obviousness issues when deciding whether to institute trial and then after trial has been instituted (including the role of secondary considerations of non-obviousness), and provide insight on PTAB final decisions to give practical guidance to both patentees and petitioners. And we will take a look at the first IPR decisions to reach the Federal Circuit, including Garmin v. Cuozzo (renamed In re Cuozzo on appeal since Garmin withdrew).
Practitioners need to understand the PTO guidelines, the effect of the AIA, and how the PTO Board of Appeals and courts apply the obviousness standard since KSR in order to successfully prepare, prosecute, and defend patents.
Our panel will provide patent counsel with guidance on the evolving obviousness standard in light of Federal Circuit treatment and analysis, the AIA, and recent USPTO guidelines. The panel will outline best practices to avoid obviousness rejections and defend patent validity.
How have recent Federal Circuit decisions affected application of the obviousness standard?
What level of “unexpected results” is needed to demonstrate patentability in light of recent decisions?
Should a Section 101 argument be part of every patent challenger’s arsenal?
What are the most effective strategies for both patentees and petitioners in prevailing on obviousness assertions in the relatively new inter partes review proceedings?

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.