Volvo Penta of the Americas, LLC v. Brunswick Corp.
81 F.4th 12022023 USPQ2d 1000Fed. Cir.
AI-generated holding
A presumption of nexus for secondary considerations requires that the product both embody the claimed invention and be coextensive with it; even absent the presumption, nexus may be proven independently through evidence of commercial success and copying due to the unique features of the claimed invention.
- Written by
- A language model, from how the MPEP uses this case rather than from the opinion.
- Confidence
- high — self-reported, not calibrated against a measured error rate
- Human review
- Not reviewed by a person
Read the opinion before relying on this in a filing. How these are made · Report an error
Cited by the manual
3 sections§ 2145→§ 716.01(b)→§ 716.01(d)→
Consideration of Applicant’s Rebuttal Arguments and Evidence
“presumption of nexus requires the product embody the invention and be coextensive with it”
Affidavits or Declarations Under 37 CFR 1.132 and Other Evidence Traversing Rejections
1 mention
Affidavits or Declarations Under 37 CFR 1.132 and Other Evidence Traversing Rejections
1 mention