Commission Reverses Initial Determination and Holds That Patent is Invalid Under § 103
The Commission held that claim 4 of U.S. Patent No. 5,227,335 (" '335") is obvious in light of certain prior art references in Inv. No. 337-TA-648, In the Matter of Certain Semiconductor Integration Circuits Using Tungsten Metallization and Products Containing Same. In its initial determination the ALJ held that dependent claim 4 of the '335 patent was invalid due to anticipation. The ALJ's decision was based largely on the testimony of an inventor of a prior art reference that the recited "etching step" was reduced to practice. The Commission held that reliance on uncorroborated inventor testimony was improper under Federal Circuit precedent and reversed the ALJ's ruling. The Commission, however, eventually held that claim 4 is obvious in light of the combination of two or more prior art references which disclose the "etching step" and that a person of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine the references. The Commission affirmed the ALJ's ruling that the remainder of the asserted claims were anticipated by prior art references. (PDF)
