1. “Whether the Panel erred by creating a new legal standard that a nexus between a patent claim and objective evidence of nonobviousness can only be presumed where the patentee has first proven that the underlying commercial product is ‘essentially the claimed invention’?” 2. “Whether the Panel erred by effectively ruling that there can never be a presumption of nexus between a patent claim and objective evidence of nonobviousness if the commercial product is covered by multiple patent claims, unless the claims are first proven to be ‘essentially the same invention’?”
