Evidence of Non-Obviousness Should Have Been Considered In Board Rejection of Snake Antivenom Patent Claims

Case: In re Sullivan (Fed. Cir. No. 2006-1507, 8/29/07)


The One Sentence Summary: In rejecting patent claims, the PTO Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences should have considered rebuttal evidence that the antivenom composition was not obvious.

Federal Circuit Holdings:

• In rejecting patent claims for obviousness, the PTO Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences should have considered rebuttal declarations tending to prove that the properties of the antivenom were unexpected, the prior art taught away from use of the compound, and the antivenom met a long-felt need.
  
• The panel disagreed with the Board's conclusion that the claims only stated a new use of a previously known compound.