Citation Network Analysis for

the United States Court of

Appeals of Federal Circuit

Decision of Patentability

Yu-Ching Kuo

PhD student

National Taiwan University of Science and Technology

2013 Fall

Problem Statement

Motivation & Problem

Statment

• Impact of US Supreme Court KSR case

– TSM Test (Teaching, Suggestion and

Motivation) caused a widely-opened door for

patent examination.

– After 2007 supreme court KSR case, the bar

for non-obviousness examination has been

lifted.

– Several rationals for non-obviousness

examination has been introduced into

examination.

– New strategy for R&D are thus needed.

Overview of KSR Literature

Overview of KSR study

Most are legal studies: 1. Rebecca S. Eisenberg, The Supreme Court and the Federal Circuit: Visitation and Custody of Patent Law, 106 Mich. L.

Rev. First Impressions 28 (2007)

2. The Honorable Timothy B. Dyk, A review of Recent Decisions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit,

57 AMULR 763 (2008)

3. Theodora Blanchfield, "Obviousness” Hit the Slot Machines: The Supreme Court's KSR decision cuts a wide swath through

industry, 11/1/08 IP L. & Bus. 14 (2008)

4. Andrew Moody, Patently Obvious: A Dual-Standard Solution to the Diverging Needs of the Information Technology and

Pharmaceutical Patent Industries,39 Golden Gate U. L. Rev. 71-109 (2008)

5. Adam Powell, KSR Fallout: Questions of Law Based on Findings of Fact and the Continuing Problem of Hindsight Bias, 1

Hastings Sci. & Tech. L.J. 241-268 (2009)

6. Mojibi, Ali, An Empirical Study of the Effect of KSR V. Teleflex on the Federal Circuit’s Patent Validity Jurisprudence,

Albany Law Journal of Science and Technology, Vol. 20, No. 3, p. 101 (2010). Available at SSRN:

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1518607

7. Marian Underweiser, Presumed obvious: how KSR redefines the obviousness inquiry to help improve the public record of a

patent. 50 IDEA 247-305, (2010)

8. USPTO, Examination Guidelines Update: Developments in the Obviousness Inquiry After KSR v.Teleflex, Federal Register,

Vol. 75, No. 169 Notices, 53643（September 1, 2010）available at http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2010/pdf/2010-21646.pdf

（last visited: 2011.4.6）

9. Rebecca Greendyke, Comment: No Patent for You!: How KSR v. Teleflex's Nonobviousness Test Conflicts with the

Scientific Method and Removes the Incentive to Innovate, 35 U. Dayton L. Rev. 413-435 (2010)

Overview of KSR study

About Strategy : more limited1. Strategies for strengthening patent protection of pharmaceutical inventions in light of

federal court decisions, urr Top Med Chem. 2010 ;10(18):1929-36.

2. Isenbarger, T.A., In re Kubin's Reinvigo Rated nonobviousness standard for DNA patents,

Wisconsin Law Review, Vol. 2009, No. 6, p. 1435-1469 (2009)

3. Natalie A. Thomas, Secondary considerations in nonobviousness analysis: The use of

objective indicia following KSR v. Teleflex, New York University Law Review, Volume 86,

Issue 6, 2011, Pages 2070-2112 (2011)

4. Hao Yin, A New Formula for Analyzing Formulation-Patent Obviousness, 83 Temp. L.

Rev. 829 (2011)

Research Objectives

Research Objectives

1. Find the most important factors for patent

non-obviousness

2. Provide a practical strategy for claim

construction

3. Provide a practical strategy for R&D

managing task

Research Design

Research Design

• Formal Study

– The Research Question has been

crystalized as “the Main Factors of Patent

Non-obviousness”

• Data Collection

– Collect U.S. federal patent case from West

Law database

– Longitudinal : from 2007~

• 2-Stage Design

– pilot study for former 100 cases

– full study for all 500 cases

Data Analysis

Data Analysis

1. Using citation network analysis to find the

main path of cases citing KSR

– Using social network software “Pajek”

2. Find the knowledge flow of the significant

cases in the main path

3. Find the rational inducing from the cases

4. Propose a practical strategy for R&D

activities.

Pilot Study

Pilot Study

1. Drawing citation networks

2. Analyzing citation network results

3. Interpretation and application of the results

Expexted Performance

Expected Performance

• Provide a global review for the citation

network of legal cases

• Provide the factors that should be take into

account when conduct R&D management.

THANK YOU