CAFC
CAFC Says GoPro Catalog is Prior Art
Written November 8, 2018
On November 1, 2018, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reissued a modified opinion holding that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) erred when it held that a certain GoPro catalog is not a prior art printed publication. GoPro, Inc. v. Contour IP Holding LLC, Fed. Cir., No. 2017-1894, 11/01/2018.
GoPro petitioned for inter partes review (IPR) of several patents related to action-sports video cameras that are configured towards remote image acquisition control and viewing, specifically challenging the patents on obviousness grounds, relying on a 2009 GoPro sales catalog as prior art. The PTAB concluded that the catalog, which was disseminated at an action-sports vehicle trade show, was not sufficiently made available to the public. The Federal Circuit disagreed, stating that though the trade show was not open to the general public, it was attended by “interested members of the relevant public”.
GoPro petitioned for inter partes review (IPR) of several patents related to action-sports video cameras that are configured towards remote image acquisition control and viewing, specifically challenging the patents on obviousness grounds, relying on a 2009 GoPro sales catalog as prior art. The PTAB concluded that the catalog, which was disseminated at an action-sports vehicle trade show, was not sufficiently made available to the public. The Federal Circuit disagreed, stating that though the trade show was not open to the general public, it was attended by “interested members of the relevant public”.