District Court's Finding re Validity of D'677 Patent - Part II

 

This post is centered on Samsung’s argument about the D’677 patent’s invalidity. After having the ‘638 as a primary reference, Samsung argued that the other differences between the ‘638 patent and the D’677 patent would have been obvious. One of the main differences between them was the fact that the D’677 had a front face that was transparent, glass-like and black with an inset screen. A Samsung expert declared that using this black transparent screen on the front face would have been obvious because black screens were the only displays screens that were available for commercial purposes. Accordingly, using black for the unified front surface was not only an obvious choice, it was the natural default.

This same expert also provided some reasons as to why a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to change the primary reference so the new device would have this transparent, glass-like black front surface. However, these reasons were not actually identified in the court’s opinion. But, the court did find them to be unsatisfactory in demonstrating obviousness.

 

Trackbacks (0) Links to blogs that reference this article Trackback URL
http://www.emergencybusinesslitigation.com/admin/trackback/286096
Comments (0) Read through and enter the discussion with the form at the end