In the latest installment of Knobbe Martens’ Law360 series on noteworthy Federal Circuit opinions, partner Jeremiah Helm writes about the Federal Circuit’s recent Netflix Inc. v. DivX LLC decision. The case, Helm writes, addresses an appeal from an inter partes review—in this case, a ruling that agreed with DivX that DivX’s claims were not unpatentable—that turned on the often-overlooked requirement that any prior art must be analogous art.
In the article, Helm discusses two separate tests that define the scope of analogous prior art, and examines how the Court dealt with them in this case.
The Court’s decision, Helm writes, “illustrates the importance of analogous art arguments in establishing or rebutting obviousness.” A patent challenger, he writes, “should be prepared to squarely address analogous art arguments on reply, and also select art that does not range too far afield when filing the petition in the first place.”
