Catholic Law Professor Megan La Belle was quoted in a recent Bloomberg Law article, “Appeals Court ‘Chips Away’ High Court’s Pliant Obviousness Take.” The article explores the Federal Circuit Court's recent ruling on general skepticism in obviousness analyses of patents in Auris Health v. Intuitive Surgical Operations.

Bloomberg Law
Date: May 11, 2022
By: Samantha Handler
Appeals Court ‘Chips Away’ High Court’s Pliant Obviousness Take

…

Auris Health centered on a twist to the motivation to combine factor, as the majority said the patent owner bears the burden of proving a patent is valid because there was lack of motivation to combine, rather than a challenger having to show that an expert in the field would have been motivated to combine earlier inventions, Megan La Belle, an intellectual property and procedure professor at Catholic University’s Columbus School of Law, said.

“What’s interesting is now it seems like, arguably, you could read this and say it’s imposing some sort of new requirement,” La Belle said.

…

Click here to read the full article.