tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1454051731189268002.post6335622119381981243..comments2023-11-13T04:42:20.544-04:00Comments on Sufficient Description: Eurocopter v Bell OverviewUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1454051731189268002.post-46960137855636104182012-02-08T21:51:03.903-04:002012-02-08T21:51:03.903-04:00Good point. It is true that sound prediction was c...Good point. It is true that sound prediction was considered, but the decision didn’t really turn on that doctrine. For claim 16, which was held to be valid, utility was based on demonstrated utility [354], not sound prediction. The claims that were invalid encompassed an embodiment with a backwards offset front cross piece. This variant was completely untested [363], nor had any theoretical modeling been done, and even the expert witness for the patentee was unwilling to testify that the landing gear would work in that configuration [364]. In short, there was no evidence of any kind, whether in the specification or produced at trial, that that embodiment would work [368]. There was also some evidence that it would not work, as a backwards offset front cross piece would be more likely to buckle on impact [366]. Martineau J therefore concluded that the claims were invalid because neither demonstrated utility nor sound prediction had been established [371]. It seems to me that on that evidence the same conclusion would have been reached even on a traditional analysis that did not mention sound prediction at all. <br /><br />With that said, this case does suggest how sound prediction might be raised in a mechanical case; for example, if the backwards offset cross piece had not been actually tested, but there had been computer modeling done which showed it would be expected to work in the same way as the front offset, which had been tested, then validity might have been established based on sound prediction.Normanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17573687140337856397noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1454051731189268002.post-80258162032685409582012-02-08T18:23:34.525-04:002012-02-08T18:23:34.525-04:00It was pointed out to me that this is one of the f...It was pointed out to me that this is one of the first cases - possibly the first - in which an assessment of sound prediction (in particular the requirement for an explicitly stated "sound line of reasoning") had been applied to subject matter outside the chem/pharma space.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com