Precedential Federal Circuit Opinions
- GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY v. RAYTHEON
TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION [OPINION] (2019-1319, 12/23/2020)
(LOURIE, REYNA and HUGHES)*
Hughes, J. The Court vacated and remanded a decision of the PTAB that had found a gas turbine engine patent not unpatentable for obviousness. The patent at issue is generally directed to a "two-stage high pressure turbine engine for commercial airplanes." As an initial matter, the Court rejected Raytheon's motion to dismiss in which it argued that General Electric lacked standing to appeal. The Court held that General Electric had standing to appeal because it "alleged sufficient facts to establish that it is engaging in activity that creates a substantial risk of future infringement." Regarding the merits, the Court held that the PTAB lacked substantial evidence for its findings that the challenged patent claims were not obvious. The Court explained that there was no substantial evidence for the PTAB's conclusion that the cited prior art taught away from using a "two stage high pressure turbine" because, among other reasons, the cited prior art "does not make a single negative statement about the use of a two-stage high-pressure turbine." The Court also found that the Board lacked substantial evidence for its findings that there was no motivation to combine the cited prior art references and that the claims were not obvious "as a whole." The Court explained that the PTAB had erred because its "approach would require a motivation to combine each element of the claim—even those present together in a reference. This analysis unduly dissects prior art references into collections of individual elements, requiring a party showing obviousness to re-do the work already done in the prior art reference."
*WilmerHale represented the appellant.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
