Ohio Patent Rules

Patdek is directed to organizing patent information. The information presented below highlights aspects of the Ohio Local Patent Rules governing invalidity contentions.

Northern District local rules (here) (no date)

N.D. Ohio L.P.R. 3.5(b) provides:

(b) Whether each item of prior art anticipates each asserted claim or renders it obvious under 35 U.S.C. §102 or §103. If obviousness is alleged, an explanation of why the prior art renders the asserted claim obvious, including an identification of any combinations of prior art showing obviousness;

N.D. Ohio L.P.R. 3.5(c) provides:

(c) For each alleged item of prior art, a chart identifying specifically where each limitation of each asserted claims are found, including for each limitation that such party contends is governed by 35 U.S.C. § 112(6), the identity of the structure(s), act(s), or material(s) in each item of prior art that performs the claimed function;

N.D. Ohio L.P.R. 3.6 concerns the document production that is to accompany invalidity contentions.

Southern District local rules (here) (published June 1, 2010)

S.D. Ohio Pat.L.R. 103.4(2) provides:

1. (2) Whether each item of prior art allegedly anticipates each asserted claim or renders it obvious. If a combination of items of prior art allegedly makes a claim obvious, each such combination and why it was obvious to make such combination, must be identified;

S.D. Ohio Pat.L.R. 103.4(3) provides:

(3) A chart identifying where specifically in each alleged item of prior art each element of each asserted claim is found, including for each element that such party contends is governed by 35 U.S.C. § 112(6), a description of the claimed function of that element and the identity of the structure(s), act(s), or material(s) in each item of prior art that performs the claimed function;

S.D. Ohio Pat.L.R. 103.5 concerns the document production that is to accompany invalidity contentions.