James Bowery <[email protected]> wrote: . . . there is the argument that any fair-selection of jurors would find > convincing: > > If it was so obvious then why didn't your GE/DoE/APS/etc... clients deploy > this technology decades ago? >
1. Patent disputes are not decided by juries. The judges are experts in patent law. 2. That argument would never fly. Many patents are never "deployed" (commercialized). That is irrelevant. The only degree of obviousness you need is in the technical description. It has to be enough to ensure the technical ability of a PHOSITA to replicate. If the invention has not actually replicated, then it can be difficult to judge whether the patent is clear enough to meet the PHOSITA standard. I suppose that if PHOSITA have already replicated when this trial begins, that would no longer be an issue. I cannot imagine holding this trial before the invention is independently replicated. That would be pointless. - Jed
