In the recent ruling of Volvo Penta of the Americas, LLC, v. Brunswick Corp, a significant precedent was set on how objective indicia of non-obviousness should be considered in patent cases. According to the ruling made by Moore, Lourie, and Cunningham, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) is obliged to take into account the combined weight of various objective indicia of non-obviousness. Furthermore, the PTAB must provide a clear explanation for the weight assigned to each objective indicia that is proven by the patent owner.
The decision came from a case that involved Volvo Penta of the Americas, LLC and Brunswick Corp, and was brought to the attention of the public by Knobbe Martens. According to the details available, this ruling is set to have significant implications on the outcomes of patent trials where the principle of non-obviousness is employed. To be considered non-obvious, a patent must present an innovative step that wouldn’t be plain to a person skilled in the related field. This ruling necessitates the PTAB to holistically analyze the multiple proven objective indicia to establish their collective impact on non-obviousness, which indeed paves the path for a more comprehensive understanding of patent non-obviousness.
For more details, you can access the original discussion of this case on JD Supra.