Protecting Innovation While Justices Ponder Helsinn V. Teva

By David Gornish (December 13, 2018, 10:56 AM EST) -- A substantial aspect of a patent attorney's practice involves advising clients about whether their inventions are sufficiently unique over the prior art to merit a patent. The term "prior art" essentially refers to types of information or activities that predate a given patent's filing date, as set forth in the Patent Act. Prior art is the primary evidence by which patentability is measured. If an invention lacks novelty or is obvious in view of the prior art, the invention is not patentable. On the other hand, if a given activity or piece of information is not prior art, it is effectively inadmissible for the purpose of demonstrating that the invention is obvious or lacks novelty. Therefore, in any patentability assessment, determining what qualifies as prior art is a threshold question....

Law360 is on it, so you are, too.

A Law360 subscription puts you at the center of fast-moving legal issues, trends and developments so you can act with speed and confidence. Over 200 articles are published daily across more than 60 topics, industries, practice areas and jurisdictions.


A Law360 subscription includes features such as

  • Daily newsletters
  • Expert analysis
  • Mobile app
  • Advanced search
  • Judge information
  • Real-time alerts
  • 450K+ searchable archived articles

And more!

Experience Law360 today with a free 7-day trial.

Start Free Trial

Already a subscriber? Click here to login

Hello! I'm Law360's automated support bot.

How can I help you today?

For example, you can type:
  • I forgot my password
  • I took a free trial but didn't get a verification email
  • How do I sign up for a newsletter?
Ask a question!