In re NuVasive, Inc.

842 F.3d 1376 (2016)

Study Aids
Case Briefs Overview
Casebooks
Case Briefs
I
From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

In re NuVasive, Inc.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
842 F.3d 1376 (2016)

  • Written by Rose VanHofwegen, JD

Facts

NuVasive, Inc. (defendant), held a patent for a spinal implant that used radiopaque markers next to its medial plane to align the implant. Medtronic, Inc. (plaintiff), petitioned the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), arguing that combining four existing implant devices with information about radiopaque markers in other applications was obvious. The PTAB found that a person having ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA) would combine the prior art and additional information to use radiopaque markers, rendering the claim invalid for obviousness. However, in reaching that conclusion, the PTAB credited expert testimony that the markers provided better alignment based on benefits recognized after the priority date of NuVasive’s patent. The ruling did not discuss benefits obtainable solely by combining only prior art references nor what would motivate a PHOSITA to combine them. Medtronic appealed, arguing that the PTAB erred.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Wallach, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 804,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 804,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership

Casebooks

Patent

Key Terms