In re Bigio
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
381 F.3d 1320, 72 U.S.P.Q.2d 1209 (2004)
- Written by Eric Miller, JD
Facts
Alberto Bigio applied for a patent on a hairbrush with an allegedly unique shape. The United States Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) examiner rejected the application on the ground of obviousness, using a combination of three toothbrush references as prior art. The PTO board of appeals affirmed. The decision was based on the conclusion that a hairbrush and a toothbrush each constituted a handheld brush consisting of a handle segment and a bristle segment. Bigio challenged the PTO’s determination that hairbrushes and toothbrushes belonged to the same field of endeavor. More specifically, Bigio argued that the process for determining an inventor’s field of endeavor lacked clear guidelines and was thus unworkably subjective. Bigio appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Rader, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 804,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
