Opinion ID: 807210
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: standard of review

Text: This court reviews the Commission’s legal determinations de novo and factual determinations for substantial evidence. Gemstar-TV Guide Int’l, Inc. v. Int’l Trade Comm’n, 383 F.3d 1352, 1360 (Fed. Cir. 2004). “Priority of an invention is a question of law to be determined based upon underlying factual determinations.” Innovative Scuba Concepts, Inc. v. Feder Indus., Inc., 26 F.3d 1112, 1115 (Fed. Cir. 1994) (citing Price v. Symsek, 988 F.2d 1187, 1190 (Fed. Cir. 1993)). Anticipation is a question of fact, and obviousness is a question of law based on underlying factual determinations. In re NTP, Inc., 654 F.3d 1279, 1297 (Fed. Cir. 2011). AMKOR TECH v. ITC 9