Part Two - Non-obviousness and Inventive Step in Software, Electronics, and Mechanical Cases: Strategies and Practical Examples for Advancing Prosecution at the USPTO and the EPO

Join us for part two of our webinar series discussing the differences between US obviousness and the EPO’s inventive step analysis, with an emphasis on the software, electronics, and mechanical arts. Having covered the legal framework in part one, in part two, we will focus on worked examples, to explore, amongst others, the following topics:

• Developing and comparing arguments challenging prima facie case for obviousness at the USPTO with the EPO’s problem-solution approach for assessing inventive step
• Analyzing the “could/would” approach as applied within the USPTO’s obviousness framework and the EPO’s problem-solution approach to inventive step
• Exploring the significance of the closest prior art in the EPO’s problem-solution approach to inventive step
• Understanding how the EPO distinguishes between technical and non-technical features in a claim and how this impacts inventive step
  
  

Speakers:
Luigi Distefano
Yelena Morozova
Sarah Rodriguez