Skip to Main Content
One of the basic tenets of patent law is that an inventor is not entitled to a patent on an invention that would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art. But who is that person? That was the question before the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) in the recent case of Daiichi Pharmaceuticals. The case shows that the inquiry on who is the person of ordinary skill in the art does not necessarily stop with the claims of the patent in suit. Daiichi's claims were directed to first- line physicians, but in finding a way to help such physicians, it had relied on scientists with very different skills. Having named those scientists as its inventors, the CAFC had no trouble in deciding that they were the actual audience for Daiichi's patent and were the persons of ordinary skill in the art.