As a community service, an educational series by the

IP and Business Law Offices of Howard L. Hoffenberg, Esq.

Copyright 2010 The IP and Business Law Offices of Howard L. Hoffenberg, Esq. All Rights Reserved.

Return to Index of Tour of US Supreme Court Patent Cases from 1961 to 1999

HOLDING: (1) The Federal Circuit must use the Administrative Procedure Act framework (2)

The Federal Circuit sets aside findings when found to be -- arbitrary, capricious, [or] an abuse of discretion, or unsupported by substantial evidence in cases reviewed on the record of a hearing. (3) The Court opined that the difference is so fine that (apart from the present case) we have failed to uncover a single instance in which one standard rather than the other would in fact have produced a different outcome.

DICKINSON v. ZURKO (June 10, 1999)

 

FACTS: The PTO concluded that the method by applicant for increasing computer security was obvious. The Federal Circuit applied a clearly erroneous standard to factual findings by the PTO; e.g., what the prior art teaches. The PTO challenged the Federal Circuit using a clearly erroneous standard, rather than the substantial evidence standard set in the Administrative Procedure Act.

Tour of US Supreme Court Patent Cases from 1961 to 1999

***

A Fast and Easy Way to Learn the High Points of Patent Law and Related Anti-trust Law

Community Service and

Pro Bono

In addition to this education series, Mr. Hoffenberg gives of his time to benefit the community and contribute to the quality justice in the State of California. For many years, he served as a volunteer pro tem in the Municipal Court in traffic, landlord-tenant, small claims and short cause matters. Currently, Mr. Hoffenberg serves as a volunteer arbitrator for the Dispute Resolution Service in attorney-client fee disputes and as a quasi-volunteer mediator in the Court of Appeals.