A process for the non-arbitrary determination of obviousness based on examining actual patenting practices of large groups could improve outcomes.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals
Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription
$29.99 / 30 days
cancel any time
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 print issues and online access
$209.00 per year
only $17.42 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
References
US Patent and Trademark Office. Trial Statistics: IPR, PGR, CBM. Patent Trial and Appeal Board, May 2017, https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Trial_Statistics_2017–05–31.pdf (2017).
Carter, J. R. Houst. Law Rev. 54, 1315–1348 (2016).
Schuster, W. M. Mich. Telecommun. Technol. Law Rev. 22, 281–286 (2015).
Shepherd, J. NYU J. Intell. Prop. Ent. L. 6, 14–46 (2016).
U.S. Code Title 35—Inter Partes Review, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2012-title35/pdf/USCODE-2012-title35-partIII-chap31.pdf.
McAllister, R.B. & Vandlen, C.E. Cornell HR Rev. http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/chrr/17 (2010).
Mullard, A. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 15, 219–221 (2016).
Schmidt, C. Nat. Biotechnol. 35, 493–494 (2017).
Timmins, G. S. Expert Opin. Ther. Pat. 24, 1067–1075 (2014).
Harbeson, S. L. et al. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 362, 359–367 (2017).
Srivastava, K. et al. Patient Prefer. Adherence 7, 419–434 (2013).
Reinhold, D.F. US Patent 3,950,411 (1976).
McCarty, L.P. US Patent 4,069,346 (1978).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Timmins, G.S. Evidence-based obviousness for use in patent prosecution and review. Nat Biotechnol 37, 997–1000 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41587-019-0232-x
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41587-019-0232-x