This morning the Federal Circuit released a nonprecedential opinion in a patent case appealed from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Notably, Judge Schall filed a dissenting opinion. Here are the introductions to the opinions.
Transtex Inc. v. Vidal (Nonprecedential)
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) found claims 1–9, 19, and 20 of U.S. Patent No. 7,942,471 (“the ’471 patent”) unpatentable as obvious. WABCO Holdings Inc. v. Transtex Composites Inc., No. IPR2018-00737, Paper 30, 2019 WL 4677106 (P.T.A.B. Sept. 24, 2019) (“’471 Final Written Decision”). Patent owner, Transtex, Inc. (“Transtex”), appeals. We affirm for the reasons set forth below.
SCHALL, Circuit Judge, dissenting.
The majority affirms the Board’s obviousness determination. It does so because it concludes that substantial evidence supports the Board’s findings with respect to motivation to combine and reasonable expectation of success. While I agree with the majority on the first point, for the reasons stated below, I part company with it on the second point.