WASHINGTON, D.C. - The Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Jan. 25 upheld a finding of invalidity where a jury was tasked with finding whether a patent was invalid for anticipation or obviousness but made no distinction between the two in its invalidity finding, holding that even though the jury was erroneously instructed as to anticipation, the patent was invalid as obvious as a matter of law (Therasense, Inc. and Abbott Laboratories v. Becton, Dickinson and Company, and Nova Biomedical Company, Nos. 2009-1008, -1009, 1010, 1034, 1035, -1036, -1037, Fed. Cir.).
Full story on lexis.com