直 Japanese PDF Font
  • Our Professionals
  • Our Work
  • Our Insights
  • Offices
  • Firm
  • Careers
Finnegan
  • Articles & Books
    • Ad Law Buzz Blog
    • At the PTAB Blog
    • European IP Blog
    • Federal Circuit IP Blog
    • INCONTESTABLE® Blog
    • Prosecution First Blog
  • Events & Webinars
  • IP Updates
  • Podcasts
    • AI + Finnegan
    • AI + Copyright
    • AI + Patent
    • AI + Privacy
    • AI + Trade Secrets
    • AI + Trademark
  • Unified Patent Court (UPC) Hub

Federal Circuit IP Blog

Federal Circuit Affirms Claim Construction and Obviousness of “Gamvatar” Patent

July 9, 2019

Authored and Edited by Amanda E. Stephenson; Kara A. Specht; Elizabeth D. Ferrill

In Game and Technology Co., Ltd. v. Activision Blizzard Inc., No. 2018-1981 (Fed. Cir. June 21, 2019), the Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB’s invalidation of Game and Technology’s patent as obvious under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 103.

Before the PTAB, Activision Blizzard sought an IPR of the challenged claims of Game and Technology’s patent, which relates to customizing characters in online games by combining game items with layers of an avatar in the game. The patent referred to the type of avatar created in this process as a “gamvatar.” The PTAB construed two key terms—“gamvatar” and “layers.” “Gamvatar” was construed as the combination of the “conventional avatar with the game item function,” and “layers” was construed as encompassing “graphics regions for displaying graphical objects” and “constructions for holding graphics.” Subsequently, the PTAB held that the challenged claims were obvious in light of prior art disclosing customizable avatars.

On appeal, the Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB’s claim construction and obviousness determinations, reiterating that under pre-AIA Section 103 “[a] patent claim is invalid ‘if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a [person having ordinary skill in the art].’”

Tags

Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), Obviousness (35 USC § 103), claim construction

Related Practices

Appeals, Issues, and Legal Strategy

Federal Circuit and Supreme Court Appeals

Contacts

Kara A. Specht
Partner
Atlanta, GA
+1 404 653 6481
Email
Elizabeth D. Ferrill
Partner
Washington, DC
+1 202 408 4445
Email

Copyright © 2019 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP. 


DISCLAIMER: Although we wish to hear from you, information exchanged in this blog cannot and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not post any information that you consider to be personal or confidential. If you wish for Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP to consider representing you, in order to establish an attorney-client relationship you must first enter a written representation agreement with Finnegan. Contact us for additional information. One of our lawyers will be happy to discuss the possibility of representation with you. Additional disclaimer information. 

Related Insights

Conference

2026 EDTX Bench Bar Conference

October 28-30, 2026

Fort Worth

Conference

Georgia Life Sciences Summit 2026

August 25-26, 2026

Sandy Springs

Conference

7th International Conference on Biofuels and Bioenergy

June 25-26, 2026

Edinburgh

Conference

IPBC Global 2026

June 15-17, 2026

San Diego

Seminar

3rd AI, IP, & Legal Forum

June 6, 2026

Shangai

Conference

17th Summit on Biosimilars & Innovator Biologics

June 2-3, 2026

New York

Articles

Article_D.-Mass-Patent-Litigation-Update-October-2024

D. Mass. Patent Litigation Update: April 2026

June 1, 2026

At the PTAB Blog

Consistency Is Key – USPTO Issues Three New Informative Decisions

May 29, 2026

At the PTAB Blog

Discretion All the Way Down: USPTO Uses a Discretionary IPR Denial to Justify a    
§ 325(d) EPR Denial

May 28, 2026

Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.

  • Privacy
  • Disclaimer
  • Legal Notices
  • Fraud Alert
  • EEO Statement
  • Cookies
  • Contact Us

© 2026 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP