Northwestern Pritzker School of Law Scholarly Commons
Abstract
Over the tenure of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, secondary considerations have become increasingly important in the analysis of nonobviousness. However, a close examination of the analytical framework behind these factors tells a cautionary tale. Courts often interpret evidentiary details of disputable import to indicate multiple secondary factors. In particular, the courts’ handling of the secondary consideration of long-felt need has allowed courts to spin mountains from evidentiary molehills. Analysis of the opinions in In re Cyclobenzaprine will demonstrate this proclivity. This Note proposes a solution: a thorough analytical method for each factor, to ensure the independence, and persuasiveness, of each. A framework for careful analysis of the secondary consideration of a long-felt need is provided
